Case ID: so2d_371/html/0202-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles Edward LANGSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 78-1827.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    May 18, 1979.
    Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender and David A. Davis, Legal Intern, Bartow, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert J. Landry, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

The revocation of appellant’s probation is affirmed, but we remand for correction of the order of revocation and the judgment and sentence.

The order assessing costs against appellant must be set aside. Since the trial court had adjudged appellant to be insolvent, it was not authorized to assess costs against him. § 939.15, Fla.Stat. (1977); Cox v. State, 334 So.2d 568 (Fla.1976).

In addition, the written order of revocation recites a finding that appellant violated conditions (a), (h), (i), and (k), although the trial court’s oral finding at the revocation hearing reflects only that condition (i) was violated. The finding of violations of conditions (a), (h), and (k) should be deleted from the order of revocation to conform to the oral finding made at the hearing.

OTT, A. C. J., and RYDER and DAN-AHY, JJ., concur.