GEORGE ALBERT HORN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sufficiency Of Evidence For Probation Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
SMITH, RUPERT, Associate Judge.
The Court revoked defendant’s probation for violation of the terms thereof and defendant appeals the Court’s ruling. The defendant maintains that since the state did not prosecute him for burglary due to insufficient evidence that his probation should not be revoked. Here the owner of jewelry testified that his jewelry was stolen, the same day defendant sold it to a jewelry Store and gave a false explanation of where the jewelry was obtained. The defendant did admit that he sold the jewelry even though he denied being involved in the burglary.
The rule on revocation of probation is whether there was sufficient evidence to satisfy the Court’s conscience that the conditions of probation were violated.
Here there is enough evidence to satisfy the Court. There is no requirement that a conviction is necessary on said evidence to support a revocation of probation. See Ordonez v. State, 408 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). The other points raised are without merit. We affirm the lower court’s ruling.
BERANEK-and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lopez v. State, 722 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…y control officer had also visited Appellant’s home a week earlier and found no one at home. The evidence for revocation of community control need only be sufficient to satisfy the conscience of the court that the violation occurred. Horn v. State, 433 So. 2d 670, 671 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The testimony was sufficient to support a conclusion that Appellant did not truthfully respond to the officer’s inquiries. See Roseboro v. State, 528 So. 2d 499, 500 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). The evidence indicates that Appellan…
-
Davis v. State, 796 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ence upon which to predicate a revocation introduced at the hearing must be sufficient to satisfy the conscience of the court that a condition of probation has been violated.” Bernhardt v. State, 288 So. 2d 490, 495 (Fla.1974); accord Horn v. State, 433 So. 2d 670, 671 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). On appeal, the trial court’s order is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. See Matthews v. State, 736 So. 2d 72, 75 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). [*1226] Appellant contends this case should be governed by Steiner v. State…
-
Eldridge v. State, 531 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…Fla. 1st DCA 1987), seems to use the committee note to Rule 3.701 d.5. to determine which offense, the prior or the subsequent, becomes the primary offense rather than to use the definition of primary offense in Rule 3.701 d.3. . See Horn v. State, 433 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). . The anomaly has been observed, see note 2 to Royer v. State, 488 So. 2d 649 (Fla. Sth DCA 1986) and see the dissent to Tuthill v. State, 518 So. 2d 1300, 1303 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). . See Leopard v. State, 491 So. 2d 1284 (Fla.…
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
- Ordonez v. State, 408 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)