A.S. v. State, 714 So. 2d 1038

FRANK, Acting Chief Judge.

We affirm A.S.’s adjudication of delinquen: cy. We remand this ease, however, for correction of the sentence. Although the trial court orally pronounced that A.S.’s sentences for Counts I and II would be served concurrently, the written commitment order provides that the sentences are to run consecutively. ‘When there is a difference between a court’s oral pronouncement and a written order, the oral pronouncement controls.” D.F. v. State, 650 So.2d 1097, 1098 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Accordingly, we remand for correction of the written order to conform to the oral pronouncement that the sentences are to run concurrently.

Remanded with instructions.

ALTENBERND and FULMER, JJ„ concur.

Case Details

Case Name: A.S. v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: Apr 17, 1998

Citations: 714 So. 2d 1038; 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4203; No. 96-03763

Docket Number: No. 96-03763

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.