Travese Woolfork v. State of Florida

MAY, J. The defendant appeals an order revoking his probation. He argues the trial court’s finding that he violated probation by associating with persons involved in criminal activity is inconsistent with the finding that he did not commit any of the alleged crimes. We disagree and affirm. We remand the case, however, for the trial court to conform the written order of revocation to its oral pronouncement. The order of revocation inaccurately reflects that the defendant violated “condition (6) as stated in affidavit dated 8/19/13.” August 19, 2013 was the date of the original affidavit. The trial court held an evidentiary hearing on the amended affidavit filed October 15, 2013. And, the court orally found the defendant violated condition 6 of his probation as alleged in the amended affidavit filed October 15, 2013. See Rodriguez v. State, 777 So.2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (holding the trial court’s written probation revocation order must conform to trial court’s oral pronouncements). We therefore affirm, but remand the case for correction of the order of revocation. Affirmed. DAMOORGIAN and GERBER, JJ., concur.