BURNEM v. STATE (2019)

We affirm, without further discussion, the judgment and sentences imposed by the trial court following the open plea to violation of probation entered by Faruq Jamil Burnem (“Appellant”). However, because the trial court did not enter a written order of revocation of probation, we remand for the court to enter an order setting forth the condition or conditions of probation that Appellant violated.¹ See Cato v. State, 845 So. 2d 250, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (remanding with directions to the trial court to enter a final order of revocation of probation citing the specific condition of probation that the defendant violated).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED for entry of a proper order of revocation of probation.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Appellate counsel brought this matter to the attention of the trial court by timely filing a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error. The court never addressed the motion; thus, it is deemed denied pursuant to subsection (b)(2)(B) of the rule (which provides that if the trial court does not file an order ruling on the motion within sixty days, the motion shall be deemed denied).

PER CURIAM.

ORFINGER, LAMBERT, and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.