WALLACE J. EDWARDS, A/K/A RONNY JETER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE; MICHAEL FERGUSON, APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a restitution hearing is required before imposing restitution as a condition of probation, and that judgments and probation orders must contain the defendant's fingerprints. The court affirmed convictions but vacated judgments and orders for correction.
Appellants Wallace J. Edwards and Michael Ferguson were convicted of grand theft. Ferguson was ordered to pay restitution as a condition of probation …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Restitution As Condition Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
OTT, Chief Judge.
Wallace J. Edwards and Michael Ferguson appeal convictions and sentences for grand theft. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The only issue raised on appeal which has merit is appellant Ferguson’s contention that the trial court erred in setting the amount of restitution Ferguson would be required to pay as a condition of probation without holding a hearing. Fresneda v. State, 347 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 1977), held that a hearing must be held with prior notice to the defendant to determine the amount of restitution to be imposed and that this amount may not exceed the amount of damage the defendant’s criminal conduct caused the victim.
In addition, while this was not raised by either party, the record before us does not reflect that either appellant Edwards’ judgment and sentence or Ferguson’s probation order, which includes an adjudication of guilt, contains the respective appellant’s fingerprints as required by section 921.-241(1), Florida Statutes (1979). Ramos v. State, No. 80-2354 (Fla. 2d DCA, Aug. 5, 1981).
Accordingly, appellants’ convictions are AFFIRMED, but Edwards’ judgment and sentence and the order placing Ferguson on probation are VACATED and the cause REMANDED for entry of proper judgments with appellants’ fingerprints affixed thereto and for a hearing on the amount of restitution to be required of Ferguson as a condition of probation. Edwards’ sentence and Ferguson’s probation order are otherwise AFFIRMED.
HOBSON and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
GAY v. State, 432 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…ns in Misdemeanor Cases, Nos. 56,734 and 58,799 (Fla. April 16, 1981). . However, we commend to the court the following cases as being instructive on the requirements on restitution. Fresneda v. State, 347 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 1977); Edwards v. State, 422 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); and Reeves v. State, 372 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).…
-
Lewis v. State, 926 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…to amend the fingerprint card accordingly. It appears the trial court should have vacated the appellant’s judgment and sentence and subsequently entered a proper written judgment and sentence with a corrected fingerprint card. See Edwards v. State, 422 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). However, where an appellant makes a fact-based challenge to the lawfulness of his conviction, the appellant’s claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion and should be raised in a rule 3.850 motion. See Martell v. State, 6…
Authorities Cited
- Fresneda v. State, 347 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 1977)