RICKY MITCHEM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Probation Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals from an order revoking his probation on the grounds that he committed three separate armed robberies. Although there is sufficient evidence to support the finding that defendant robbed Nugget Oil Store # 7 and we affirm the order of revocation on this ground, there was no evidence introduced at the violation of probation hearing to support the findings that defendant also robbed Nugget Oil Store # 11 and a Taco Rancho Restaurant. Therefore, we remand the case to the trial court with instructions to strike that portion of the order of revocation of probation finding defendant robbed Nugget Oil Store #11 and the Taco Rancho Restaurant. Otherwise, that portion of the order revoking defendant’s probation on the finding that he robbed Nugget Oil Store # 7 is affirmed.
AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part.
McCORD, BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Loury v. Loury, 431 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…. Because of the result reached in this case, it is not necessary for us to determine if the property in question was awarded to the appel-lee as a settlement of property rights or because of a marital duty of the husband to the wife. Cobb v. Cobb, 399 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).…
-
Pabian v. Pabian, 480 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…ents considered to be alimony or support, which are enforceable by contempt. 58 Fla. Bar Journal 67, The Contempt Dilemma: Support vs. Property and Third Party Debts. See also Zuccarello v. Zuccarello, 429 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Cobb v. Cobb, 399 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). We believe that the husband’s obligation to pay the wife’s automobile payments is in the nature of support rather than a settlement of property rights because of the prominent role which an automobile plays in our everyday life.…
-
McCOMBES v. McCOMBES, 440 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…means “nourishment” and “sustenance.” Fort v. Fort, 90 So. 2d 313, 315 (Fla.1956). Because of public necessity that dependents be supported, the contempt power of the court may be used in this sense only to enforce payment of alimony. Cobb v. Cobb, 399 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). The husband’s agreement to pay a lump sum in periodic payments in exchange for the wife’s relinquishment of valuable property rights such as support alimony are usually treated as a property settlement even though called “alimon…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence