NASRALLAH v. STATE (2021)

Michael Barry Nasrallah appeals his convictions and sentences for one count of attempted sexual battery and three counts of attempted lewd or lascivious molestation. We affirm his convictions and sentences without comment but remand this case for the trial court to enter a written order of competency.

“Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.212(c)(7) directs that if a trial court concludes that a heretofore incompetent defendant has become competent to stand trial, 'it shall enter its order so finding and shall proceed.' “ Hampton v. State, 988 So. 2d 103, 106 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (emphasis in original). “Where ․ a court has orally found a defendant competent but erroneously failed to enter the required written order, we have affirmed with directions to enter the order nunc pro tunc.” Id.

Here, the trial court made an oral finding that Nasrallah had regained competency to stand trial on August 29, 2018; however, the trial court never reduced its oral pronouncement to a written order. This was an error, see Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.212(c)(7), but this error does not require reversal, see Hampton, 988 So. 2d at 106. Therefore, we affirm Nasrallah's convictions and sentences and remand with directions to enter the order nunc pro tunc. See id.

Affirmed with directions.

PER CURIAM.

SILBERMAN, ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.