We affirm the judgment and sentence imposed by the trial court following the revocation of Appellants drug offender probation, but we find it necessary to remand this case with directions that the court correct a scriveners error in the order revoking probation to reflect that Appellant did not commit a violation of condition 24 of her probation. The revocation order inadvertently states that Appellant violated condition 24 of her probation; however, she was never charged with violating this condition, nor was this condition part of her original order of drug offender probation. See generally Daniels v. State, 200 So. 3d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (finding that remand was appropriate to correct technical error in order revoking probation to clarify sole condition of probation that defendant admitted to violating).
Affirmed; Remanded to correct scriveners error.
Per Curiam.
Wallis, Harris, and Boatwright, JJ., concur.