LANCE THOMAS ACORD
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A probation revocation cannot be based entirely on hearsay evidence, and a violation for failure to pay a monetary obligation requires sufficient evidence of the probationer's willfulness, including ability to pay.
[1] A probation revocation decision cannot be based entirely on hearsay evidence, although hearsay is admissible at probation revocation hearings.
[2] In probation revocation proceedings based on failure to pay a monetary obligation, the State must present sufficient evidence of the probationer's willfulness, including…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“Hearsay evidence is admissible at evidentiary hearings for probation revocation, but a decision to revoke probation cannot be based entirely on hearsay.”
Court citing White v. State regarding the admissibility standard for hearsay in probation revocation proceedings.
Acord was placed on probation with conditions including not absconding and paying court costs and fines. The trial court revoked his probation based o…
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 Hearsay Evidence In Probation Revocation Hearings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Lance Thomas Acord appeals a revocation order in which the trial court found that Acord violated probation by absconding (condition three) and by failing to pay court costs and fines (condition ten). Acord argues, and the State concedes, that the revocation for violation of condition three was improperly based solely on hearsay evidence. Regarding the violation of condition ten, Acord contends, and the State concedes, that there was insufficient evidence to support that a violation had occurred. Because we agree with Acord and accept the State’s concessions, we reverse the revocation order and remand with instruction that his probation be reinstated. See White v. State, 170 So. 3d 144, 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (“Hearsay evidence is admissible at evidentiary hearings for probation revocation, but a decision to revoke probation cannot be based entirely on hearsay.”); see also Del Valle v. State, 80 So. 3d 999, 1015 (Fla. 2011) (“[I]n all probation revocation proceedings in which the violation is a failure to pay a monetary obligation as a condition of the probation, . . . the State must present sufficient evidence of the probationer’s willfulness, which includes evidence on ability to pay, to support the trial court’s finding of willfulness.”). REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions. LEWIS, MAKAR, and BILBREY, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- del Valle v. State, 80 So. 3d 999 (Fla. 2011)
- White v. State, 170 So. 3d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)