LOG IN
    SELECT A PUBLICATION:
Florida Law Weekly
FLW Supplement
FLW Federal
User Name:
Password:
 


CONTACT
    Toll-free: 800-351-0917
    E-mail us
    Submit Opinions

PLACE AN ORDER
    Print Editions
    Online Editions
    Bound Volumes
    2/24-Hour Online Access


OUR PUBLICATIONS
    Florida Law Weekly
    FLW Supplement
    FLW Federal
    Collected Cases
    Sample FLW Online


RESEARCH
    Cross Citations
    Week In Review
    Rule Revisions
    Review Granted
    Current Issue Index
     Civil Section
     Criminal Section
    2023 Cumulative Index
     Civil Section
     Criminal Section
    Public Reprimands
    Florida Statutes
    Helpful Links



  
22 Fla. L. Weekly D2175c

RAFAEL ALVAREZ, Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. 3rd District. Criminal law -- Sentencing -- Order -- Written order must be corrected to conform to court's oral pronouncement

RAFAEL ALVAREZ, Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 96-2326. L.T. Case No. 95-37588. Opinion filed September 17, 1997. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Leonard E. Glick, Judge. Counsel: Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Doquyen T. Nguyen, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

(Before COPE, GERSTEN and SHEVIN, JJ.)

(PER CURIAM.) Rafael Alvarez appeals a sentencing order imposed on multiple convictions. We affirm the portion of the sentence that stacks the three-year mandatory minimums imposed on counts two and three. State v. Christian, 692 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1997); State v. Thomas, 487 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 1986). However, that portion of the written sentence that orders the mandatory minimum sentences in counts two, three and five to run consecutively does not conform to the court's oral pronouncements. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court stated: ``Counts 3 and 5 run concurrent to each other, but consecutive to Count 2 for a total of six years minimum mandatory.'' Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the sentence, remand the cause to the trial court and direct the court to enter a sentencing order in conformance with that pronouncement.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.

* * *