ANGLIN v. STATE (2022)

John Ruben Anglin challenges the revocation of his probation and the resulting sentence in an appeal brought under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm both the revocation and sentence without further comment. However, we remand for the trial court to correct two scrivener's errors in the order of revocation. See Huggins v. State, 216 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).

First, the order of revocation states that Mr. Anglin admitted to the violations, but it should indicate, in keeping with the record, that he was found to be in violation following a hearing. The order also erroneously reflects that Mr. Anglin violated special condition two of his probation by failing to abstain from alcohol when the record expressly reflects that he was found not to have violated that special condition. The order of revocation should therefore be corrected to reflect that Mr. Anglin was found to have violated condition three by leaving his county of residence and condition five by both resisting arrest without violence and committing a breach of the peace. See Davis v. State, 259 So. 3d 313, 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).

Affirmed; remanded.

PER CURIAM.

MORRIS, C.J., and KELLY and SMITH, JJ., Concur.