LAMB v. STATE (2021)

Affirmed. We affirm the trial court's ruling, but remand for correction of a scrivener's error contained in Appellant's order of probation. See Boggs v. Wainwright, 223 So. 2d 316, 317 (Fla. 1969). The order erroneously vacates Appellant's probation for count XXIV and, instead, imposes it across counts I, II, III and XXIII, which would impermissibly cause these sentences to exceed the statutory maximum. However, the hearing transcripts clearly indicate that the trial court intended to only remove the sex offender designation while keeping probation on count XXIV. Accordingly, on remand, the trial court should correct the judgment to reflect probation on count XXIV, and remove the probation term on counts I, II, III, and XXIII. Appellant need not be present for the correction of the error.

Per Curiam.

Ray, C.J., and Lewis and Jay, JJ., concur.