RICHARD DAVIS A/K/A RICKY REEVES, 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 affirmed the trial court's finding that the appellant violated probation by failing to file monthly reports, but remanded for correction of the order and for review of the sentence using a proper guidelines scoresheet.
A probation violation finding based on failure to file monthly reports is affirmed, but the order must be corrected to reflect only that specific violation and the sentence must be reviewed using a proper guidelines scoresheet.
[1] A probation violation order must accurately reflect the specific violations found by the trial court rather than incorporating all allegations in the affidavit.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Richard Davis was found to have violated a condition of his probation. The trial court's order stated he violated probation as alleged in ea…
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 Sentence Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case came to us in the form of an Anders brief filed by the public defender. We have reviewed the record pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) and find no reversible error as to the trial court’s determination that appellant violated a condition of his probation. We do note, however, that the order incorrectly states that the court concluded appellant had violated his probation as alleged in each paragraph of the affidavit, when in fact the trial court only considered appellant’s failure to file monthly reports.
We also note that appellant’s scoresheet was not made a part of the record on appeal. We requested that the public defender or the state attorney’s office supplement the record on appeal, however, both parties have indicated they were unable to locate the scoresheet. Without a score-sheet we are unable to review the propriety of appellant’s sentence. Accordingly, we remand this case to the trial court to review and determine the propriety of the sentence imposed upon consideration of a guidelines scoresheet prepared in accordance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701. The order finding appellant guilty of violating his probation should also be corrected to reflect the fact that the trial court only found that appellant had violated his probation by failing to file monthly reports.
AFFIRMED, but remanded for review of sentence.
HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.