LUIS RODRIGUEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ability To Pay Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s probation revocation and sentence of fifteen years in prison.
There was competent, substantial evidence to support the trial court’s findings that appellant had violated his probation by (1) failing to file monthly reports with his probation supervisor and (2) committing a burglary. It is clear that appellant’s probation could and would have been revoked on the basis of these violations alone.
However, since appellant had been adjudged insolvent and there was no evidence concerning his ability to pay the costs of his supervision, it was improper for the trial court to find that he had violated his probation by failing to pay those costs, and that finding must be stricken. Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Accordingly, the revocation of appellant’s probation is affirmed, but the cause is remanded with directions to strike from the revocation order the finding that appellant violated condition (11) of his probation.
BOARDMAN, A. C. J., and GRIMES and OTT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 429 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…ution, it would have been improper for the trial court to find that he had violated his probation by failing to pay monies required by either condition and, therefore, we agree that conditions 10 and 11 should have been stricken. Rodriguez v. State, 405 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Condition 7, however, consists of two parts. While the portion dealing with the support of dependents would, standing alone, be stricken pursuant to Rodriguez, supra, the porti…
-
Jones v. State, 479 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…ficient to show that appellant had the ability to make the financial payments required of him by conditions (2) and (10) of his probation. The trial court therefore erred in finding appellant guilty of violating these conditions. Rodriguez v. State, 405 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). There was, however, sufficient evidence presented to support the trial court’s finding that appellant failed to submit written monthly reports and to follow lawful instructions given to him by his probation officer. Although fai…
Authorities Cited
- Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)