Palmer v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2008 IRVING PALMER, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D08-3456 [October 22, 2008] PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court s denial of appellant s motion to correct an illegal sentence. Appellant claims that his sentence, imposed after he violated probation, is illegal because the court failed to impose general conditions of probation when the court sentenced him for the underlying crimes in 1992. To the contrary, the written order of probation provides that the appellant must not violate the law, the general condition of probation which appellant violated. Defendants are constructively on notice of statutorily imposed general conditions of probation and those listed in the standard probation form within the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89, 105 (Fla. 2000). A general condition of probation does not have to be orally imposed at sentencing, and due process is satisfied if it is contained in the written sentencing order. Id. Appellant s claim that he did not receive a copy of the written sentencing order is not a claim cognizable under rule 3.800(a) which requires the claim of illegality to appear on the face of the record. Affirmed. SHAHOOD, C.J., WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur. * * * Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Pedro E. Dijols, Judge; L.T. Case No. 91-17742 CF10A. Irving Palmer, Indiantown, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 2
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.
