DAVID ROTH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Substantial Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed as to condition (1). As to condition (8), we affirm as to appellant’s failure to keep his appointments at the job bank as instructed by his probation officer. Appellant’s further violation of condition (8), that he failed to make payments towards restitution as instructed, is stricken from the order of revocation of probation, and conditions (2) and (23) are also stricken, as there was no determination of appellant’s financial condition such that payment could be made. See Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Further, condition (7) is stricken from the order of revocation of probation as there was no evidence that appellant failed to work diligently at a lawful occupation to the best of his ability.
We decline to set aside the revocation, because the failure to file reports for four consecutive months as required by condition (1) and repeated failure to follow the probation officer’s instructions to visit the job bank are substantial violations. Wheeler v. State, 344 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).
RYDER, A. C. J., and DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Edwards v. State, 439 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…d, 434 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1983). It is also clear that the defendant failed to file any written report for two months. This is a substantial violation of the conditions of probation. Chappell v. State, 429 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Roth v. State, 406 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 2d DCA [*1029] 1981); Aaron v. State, 400 So. 2d 1033, 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA) (Nesbitt, J. dissenting), pet. for review denied, 408 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. 1981). Appellant does not dispute that he failed to make restitution payments and payments for…
-
Roseboro v. State, 528 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…ion eight of the appellant’s probation. Cf. Jones v. State, 479 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (failure to file written reports and failure to follow probation officer’s instructions may be considered substantial violations). See also, Roth v. State, 406 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). The trial court, therefore, did not abuse its discretion in revoking the appellant’s probation. Affirmed. DANAHY, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.…
-
Brown v. State, 492 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…iled a timely notice of appeal. Because hearsay statements were the only evidence presented concerning the violation of conditions (3) and (8), those violations must be stricken from the order revoking appellant’s community control. Terry v. State, 406 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). We decline to set aside the order of revocation, however, because the record indicates that the trial court would have revoked community control based solely upon the substantive violation of condition (5), which is amply support…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Coxon v. State, 365 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Wheeler v. State, 344 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)