CHRISTINE THOMAS, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a probation condition prohibiting pregnancy outside marriage as facially invalid under the three-pronged Rodriguez test because it bore no relationship to the offense, regulated non-criminal conduct, and was not reasonably related to future criminality.
A probation condition prohibiting pregnancy outside marriage is invalid because it bears no relationship to the offense, regulates non-criminal conduct, and is not reasonably related to future criminality.
[1] A probation condition that prohibits pregnancy outside marriage is invalid as bearing no relationship to the offense, regulating non-criminal conduct, and failing to rela…
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 intelligenceChristine Thomas pleaded no contest to grand theft and battery after stealing six gold watches from a department store and struggling with store emplo…
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 Special Conditions Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
WIGGINTON, Judge.
Christine Thomas appeals from her sentence of probation, challenging a special condition thereof that she is not to become pregnant during her term of probation unless she is married. We reverse.
Thomas pled no contest to counts I and II of an information charging her with grand theft and battery. The charges were based on her stealing six gold metal watches from a department store and subsequently struggling with a store employee and a citizen who attempted to stop her from fleeing. On appeal, she maintains that the special condition of probation is invalid under the three-pronged test set forth in Rodriguez v. State, 378 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The State maintains that Thomas has failed to preserve this issue for review as she made no objection below, citing Walker v. State, 461 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). However, Walker notwithstanding, the imposition of this special condition of probation is so grossly erroneous on its face as (1) bearing no relationship to the offense for which Thomas was convicted; (2) relating to conduct which is not in itself criminal; and (3) requiring or forbidding conduct which is not reasonably related to future criminality, in the interest of justice we must strike the special condition from the probation order. Cf. Howland v. State, 420 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
ZEHMER, J., concurs.
BOOTH, J., dissents with written opinion.
BOOTH, Judge,
dissenting:
Appellant raised no objection at sentencing to the condition of probation that she now seeks to challenge on appeal. The order below should be affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rodriguez v. State, 378 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Howland v. State, 420 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Moye v. Bayou Grande Villa Ass'n, Inc., 461 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Nettie Walker v. State, 461 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)