PATRICIA WOODARD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statutory Compliance cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
For the alleged violation of three conditions, appellant’s probation was revoked. One of the conditions allegedly violated was the provision that appellant fully comply with Section 945.30, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1974), requiring probationers to contribute to the cost of their supervision. In order to revoke probation for failure to comply with said statute the trial court must find that the probationer's financial condition was such that she could make the required payment; there must be a finding of an ability to pay. Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1979). The record in this case contains no adequate finding of the appellant’s ability to comply with the condition in question.
Accordingly, the order revoking appellant’s probation based upon a violation of Condition Four by failing to comply with Section 945.30, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1974), is reversed and that part of said order is stricken. However, the order revoking appellant’s probation based upon the other violations contained in the Amended Affidavit filed December 1, 1977, is affirmed.
REVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.
DOWNEY, C. J., and ANSTEAD and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Donnie Warren v. State, 499 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…ory fee and the special condition requiring the defendant to enter a substance abuse program, we find that these violations must be reversed. The trial court did not make a finding that the defendant had the ability to pay the fee, Woodard v. State, 371 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Adams v. State, 459 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Furthermore, the special condition was not orally pronounced at the defendant’s sentencing nor was there support in the record for the subsequent addition of this condition on…
-
Smith v. State, 380 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…as to three distinct violations of probation. We do not agree that there was a sufficient showing as to failure of probationer to make periodic payments to the state. There must be a sufficient demonstration of ability to pay. See Woodard v. State, 371 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). And there must be a specific finding regarding the ability to pay. See Cohen v. State, 365 So. 2d 1052 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). We therefore remand the cause with directions to strike the holding that failure to make monthly paymen…
-
Porter v. State, 380 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…ation when it is one of the imposed conditions. See Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). However, we do not feel that the probationer’s ability to pay his required monthly payments was sufficiently demonstrated. See Woodard v. State, 371 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). Accordingly, we remand this cause to the trial court to enter a further order removing the holding that failure to make the monthly payments was in violation of probation. In all other respects this cause is affirmed. AFFIRME…
Authorities Cited
- Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)