Barlow v. StateBarlow v. State
Appellant appeals from an order withholding adjudication of guilt, which among other provisions, required him to serve two years probation and to make restitution to the victims of his assault.
Appellant first contends thjit the order sentencing him to two years probation was incorrect because the court had announced that the probation would be comprised of two consecutive one year terms. The state concedes that appellant’s position is correct. We therefore remand for correction of the order of probation. See McClure v. State,
Appellant also contends that condition nine of the order requiring him to pay one-half of the total restitution to the victims was incorrect. We disagree and affirm.
In Fresneda v. State,
In Fresneda, however, there was a motion directed to the trial court to correct an illegal sentence. That was not done in the instant case. See Pope v. State,
We remand to the trial court for correction of the order to conform to the oral announcement of the court that appellant would be required to serve two consecutive one year probationary terms.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part.