Case Name: Brutus NED, III, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1997-07-25
Citations: 696 So. 2d 1365
Docket Number: Nos. 96-00405, 96-00439 and 96-00440
Parties: Brutus NED, III, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 696
Pages: 1365–1366

Head Matter:
Brutus NED, III, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Nos. 96-00405, 96-00439 and 96-00440.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
July 25, 1997.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Julius J. Aulisio, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Stephen D. Ake, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

Opinion:
BLUE, Judge.
Brutus Ned, III, appeals the revocation of his community control in three circuit court cases. The State presented sufficient evidence to support the revocations of community control and, therefore, we affirm. Howev er, we remand the ease to the trial court to enter a written order specifying the community control conditions that Ned violated. See Coley v. State, 479 So.2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
Although we affirm the revocations, we reverse the sentences imposed and remand for resentencing. When Ned disputed the prior convictions on his sentencing guidelines scoresheet, the court failed to require the State to produce corroborating evidence. The State concedes this was error. See Johnson v. State, 583 So.2d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). On remand, the State shall be given an opportunity to corroborate the challenged convictions.
Revocations of community control affirmed, remanded for entry of written order, sentences reversed and remanded for resen-tencing.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.