Case Name: Gerard JOSEPH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-04-05
Citations: 616 So. 2d 1063
Docket Number: No. 91-3961
Parties: Gerard JOSEPH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: ERVIN, BARFIELD and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 616
Pages: 1063–1064

Head Matter:
Gerard JOSEPH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 91-3961.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
April 5, 1993.
Kathryn L. Sands, Jacksonville, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Laura Rush, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In this direct criminal appeal, appellant raises two issues: whether it was error to deny his motion to suppress evidence, because the state failed to establish that his consent to search was given intelligently and voluntarily; and whether the written sentence imposed should be corrected because it is inconsistent with the trial court's oral sentence. We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to suppress. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction. However, we agree that the written sentence is inconsistent with the trial court's oral sentence, because it omits any reference to either a $50,-000.00 fine or $220.00 in court costs, both of which were included in the oral sentence. Accordingly, we reverse the sentence, and remand with directions that the trial court correct the written sentence to correspond to its oral pronouncement.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.
ERVIN, BARFIELD and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.