NICHOLAS C. HARRIS vs STATE OF FLORIDA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ Case No. 5D22-2665 LT Case No. 2020-303667-CFDB _____________________________ NICHOLAS C. HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. Raul A. Zambrano, Judge. Matthew Metz, Public Defender, and Kathryn Rollison Radtke, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. No Appearance for Appellee. February 23, 2024 PER CURIAM. In this Anders* appeal, we affirm the judgment and sentence imposed by the trial court but remand for the trial court to: (1) correct the written judgment in 2020-303667-CFDB to reflect that * Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Appellant was tried and found guilty by jury of, and is adjudicated guilty of, manslaughter (a lesser included offense), with a weapon, under sections 782.07(1) and 775.087(1)(b), Florida Statutes; (2) correct the written order of probation to reflect that Appellant was found guilty by jury verdict of, and is adjudicated guilty of, manslaughter (a lesser included offense), with a weapon; and (3) correct the scoresheet to list the description of the primary offense as manslaughter (a lesser included offense), with a weapon, and list the corresponding Florida Statutes of the primary offense, sections 782.07(1) and 775.087(1)(b). AFFIRMED; REMANDED for correction of scrivener’s errors. MAKAR and WALLIS, JJ., concur. PRATT, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with opinion. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________ 2 Case No. 5D22-2665 LT Case No. 2020-303667-CFDB PRATT, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part. I concur in the panel’s affirmance of the judgment and sentence, but I respectfully dissent from the panel’s sua sponte correction of scrivener’s errors in this Anders appeal. See Flowers v. State, No. 5D23-844, 2024 WL 387177, at *1–2 (Fla. 5th DCA Feb. 2, 2024) (Eisnaugle, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part). 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
