JACKIE DAVIS, 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 probation revocation order can be affirmed based on proven violations even if one alleged violation was not proven.
The defendant's probation was revoked based on multiple alleged violations, including possessing cocaine, drug paraphernalia, marijuana, and committin…
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 Violation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
In 1983, defendant Jackie Davis was placed on probation for robbery and possession of cannabis with intent to deliver. In 1984, the trial judge revoked the defendant’s probation on finding that he had violated condition five of his probation by: (1) possessing cocaine; (2) possessing drug paraphernalia; (3) possessing marijuana; and (4) committing an armed robbery. The court also found that the defendant had violated condition eight of his probation by failing to report to his probation officer immediately upon release from jail.
Defendant argues that the order revoking his probation incorrectly states that he committed crimes which were not proven at the revocation hearing. We find the evidence is sufficient to establish all of the foregoing violations except (4), committing an armed robbery. At defendant’s revocation hearing, no evidence was presented regarding that alleged violation. In fact, during the hearing the assistant state attorney said he was not going to introduce any testimony concerning the armed robbery.
Since the record discloses sufficient evidence to establish that defendant violated his probation by possession of marijuana, cocaine and drug paraphernalia, we affirm the order of revocation. However, we remand with directions to strike that portion of the order finding that the defendant committed armed robbery. Paul v. State, 421 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Davis v. State, 411 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
GRIMES, Acting C.J., and SCHOON-OVER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sherwood v. State, 933 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…ons in its written order of revocation, the trial court concluded that Mr. Sherwood had committed violations for which the State presented no evidence. We cannot sustain a revocation of probation based on unsupported allegations. See Davis v. State, 478 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We also conclude that one of the curfew violations is not substantial. See Anthony v. State, 854 So. 2d 744, 747 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (holding that trial court may revoke a defendant’s probation only upon a determination that the…
-
Astore v. State, 618 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…), reported by Larry Michael, is not supported by an an affidavit from him attesting to the conduct attributed to Astore. Because the trial court erroneously found a violation not established at the hearing, we set the finding aside. Davis v. State, 478 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Based upon the foregoing, we reverse the order.of revocation and remand this matter for the trial court to reconsider whether, in the absence of two of the three violations, the revocation of Astore’s probation and the impositio…
-
Davis v. State, 943 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…refore, his testimony was not hearsay as to the discovery of marijuana. Because the record discloses sufficient evidence that Davis violated his probation by possession of marijuana, we need not address Davis’ other claim. See, e.g., Davis v. State, 478 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Randolph v. State, 292 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). The trial court made it abundantly clear that possession of marijuana [*330] alone was sufficient to revoke Davis’ probation. Affirmed. GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gean Claude Paul v. State, 421 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Cullen Davis v. State, 411 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)