context: The State concedes that the trial court should not have based part of its ruling on allegations from the 2010 petition because it had been dismissed. But the State urges affirmance nonetheless because evidence related to the 2013 petition -- numerous discourteous text messages sent by Mr. Ardis -- independently supports the judgment and sentence.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.parenthetical: affirming a. defendant's convictions for burglary and other crimes despite an error in convicting on a nolle prossed kidnapping charge
citation_a.sentence: See, e.g., Wilkins v. State, 90 So.3d 305 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming a. defendant’s convictions for burglary and other crimes despite an error in convicting on a nolle prossed kidnapping charge); but see Freccacreto v. State, 291 So.2d 630, 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) (finding that a guilty judgment on nolle prossed charges violates the state constitution and is fundamental error and remanding for entry of an appropriate sentence on the remaining conviction).
citation_b.signal: but see
citation_b.identifier: 291 So.2d 630, 631
citation_b.parenthetical: finding that a guilty judgment on nolle prossed charges violates the state constitution and is fundamental error and remanding for entry of an appropriate sentence on the remaining conviction
citation_b.sentence: See, e.g., Wilkins v. State, 90 So.3d 305 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming a. defendant’s convictions for burglary and other crimes despite an error in convicting on a nolle prossed kidnapping charge); but see Freccacreto v. State, 291 So.2d 630, 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) (finding that a guilty judgment on nolle prossed charges violates the state constitution and is fundamental error and remanding for entry of an appropriate sentence on the remaining conviction).