LEROY FRAZIER, 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.
Leroy Frazier appeals his probation revocation and resulting 15-year sentence. The court reversed, holding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke probation because the revocation process was not initiated within the probationary period—the probation had expired on February 3, 1985, but revocation proceedings were not commenced until August 1985, more than six months later.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke probation because the revocation process was not set in motion during the probationary period. Although violations may have occurred during the probationary period, jurisdiction to revoke requires that the revocation process commence before the probationary period expires.
[1] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to revoke probation for violations if the revocation process is not initiated during the probationary period.
[2] A probation revocation proceeding must be commenced before the expiration of the probation term.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial court lacks jurisdiction to revoke probation for violations which occur during the probationary period unless the revocation process is set in motion during the probationary period.”
Establishes the controlling legal principle: jurisdiction requires that revocation proceedings commence before the probationary period expires.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFrazier was placed on probation for 30 months on February 4, 1980, after pleading guilty to aggravated battery. His probation was modified twice: in J…
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 Jurisdiction To Revoke Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
The appellant, Leroy Frazier, appeals a judgment and sentence entered after he was found guilty of violating the terms and conditions of his probation. We find that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to revoke appellant’s probation and, accordingly, reverse.
On February 4, 1980, the trial court placed appellant on probation for a period of thirty months after appellant pled guilty to a charge of aggravated battery. The record on appeal reflects two subsequent orders modifying appellant’s probation. The first order, entered in July of 1982, extended appellant’s probation until February 3, 1985. The second order, dated February 28, 1985, required appellant to serve a total of five years probation.
On August 21, 1985, appellant’s probation officer executed an affidavit alleging that appellant had violated his probation. On August 29, 1985, a warrant was issued charging appellant with violating the conditions of his probation. Prior to the probation revocation hearing, which was held on August 29, 1986, an amended affidavit was filed alleging an additional ground for revocation. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court found that appellant had violated the conditions of his probation. The trial court revoked appellant’s probation, adjudicated him guilty of the underlying offense of aggravated battery, and sentenced him to fifteen years imprisonment. This appeal timely followed.
We agree with appellant’s contention that his probation had expired prior to the state’s attempt to revoke it and that, therefore, the court did not have jurisdiction to proceed.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to revoke probation for violations which occur during the probationary period unless the revocation process is set in motion during the probationary period. Gardner v. State, 412 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); White v. State, 410 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Carpenter v. State, 355 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). According to the record on appeal, appellant’s probation had expired on February 3, 1985, before the second modification order was signed and more than six months before any action was commenced to revoke appellant’s probation. The trial court, therefore, did not have jurisdiction to revoke appellant’s probation. We, accordingly, reverse and remand with instructions to discharge the appellant on this charge.
Reversed and remanded.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McCARRICK v. State, 553 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…olation. Tuff v. State, 338 So. 2d 1335 (Fla.2d DCA 1976). Here, however, it appears McCarrick has served the period of community control. If so, the trial court has no further jurisdiction to revoke probation or community control. Frazier v. State, 510 So. 2d 646 (Fla.2d DCA 1987). Accordingly, we reverse the revocation of McCarrick’s probation. SCHOONOVER and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Gardner v. State, 412 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- White v. State, 355 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Carpenter v. State, 355 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- White v. State, 410 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)