TERRY LEROY TILLMAN, 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.
Tillman's conviction for violation of community control was affirmed because the assigned officer's direct testimony about advising him of conditions and witnessing his signature was not hearsay, but his sentence was reversed for failure to credit earned jail time.
Direct testimony by the assigned community control officer regarding advice given and signature witnessed is not hearsay and properly supports a community control violation conviction.
[1] Direct testimony by an assigned probation or community control officer regarding advice given to a defendant and the defendant's signature on a conditions form is not hea…
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 intelligenceTillman was convicted of violating community control. He challenged the conviction based on hearsay statements in probation records, relying on Adams …
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 Community Control cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, Judge.
Terry Leroy Tillman appeals his conviction and sentence for violation of community control.
Tillman contends that his conviction was improper because it was based on the hearsay statement of his probation officer that he had been advised as to the conditions of his probation and had signed the form. He relies on Adams v. State, 521 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) for the proposition that information contained in probation records not received in evidence is hearsay.' Such reliance is misplaced. In Adams only the intake officer (not the assigned probation officer) testified and her testimony was based solely on the proba tion records that were not received in evidence. In the case at bar the assigned community control officer testified that she advised appellant of the conditions of his community control and witnessed his signing the form. This is not hearsay.
Tillman’s additional complaint that the only evidence of his violation was also hearsay is not supported by the record.
We find that his conviction was proper. The court did err in failing to credit all of appellant’s earned jail time against his sentence. See State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla.1989).
Conviction AFFIRMED; sentence REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.
COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Furlow v. State, 579 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 1991)…a. 5th DCA 1991); Hill v. State, 565 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Brown v. State, 565 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Little v. State, 561 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); McLaughlin v. State, 558 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Tillman v. State, 552 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Kelly v. State, 552 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Johnson v. State, 548 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). The defendant’s sentences are vacated and the cause remanded for resentencing consistent with this opinion. SENTENCES…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 1989)
- Adams v. State, 521 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)