LAWRENCE TYLER HOWARD
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.
Lawrence Tyler Howard was convicted of leaving the scene of an accident involving death following a no-contest plea. On appeal, he challenged a special probation condition prohibiting early termination without the State's approval. The court reversed that condition as an impermissible restriction on the trial court's future authority to discharge probation early.
A trial court cannot impose a special probation condition that prohibits early termination without the State's approval because such a condition impermissibly divests the Department of Corrections of its authority to recommend early termination and prevents the circuit court from exercising its future authority to discharge the probationer.
[1] A trial court cannot impose a special condition of probation that prevents a future court from exercising its authority to discharge a probationer early.
[2] A special condition of probation prohibiting early termination without the State's approval is impermissible as it divests the court of its future authority.
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“By imposing the special condition prohibiting early termination of probation without the State's approval, the trial judge effectively prevented the circuit court in the future from exercising its authority to discharge Defendant's probation early. This is impermissible.”
Establishes the core holding that such conditions are impermissible restrictions on the circuit court's authority.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLawrence Tyler Howard pleaded no-contest to one count of leaving the scene of an accident involving death. The trial court imposed a sentence that inc…
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 Early Termination Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
DAMOORGIAN, J.
Lawrence Tyler Howard (“Defendant”) appeals his conviction and sentence for one count of leaving the scene of an accident involving death following an open plea of no-contest, and the denial of his rule 3.800 motion to correct sentencing error. Defendant raises several issues on appeal, only one of which has merit. He argues the trial court erred in imposing a special condition of probation prohibiting early termination of probation without the State’s approval. We agree and reverse.
By imposing the special condition prohibiting early termination of probation without the State’s approval, the trial judge effectively prevented the circuit court in the future from exercising its authority to discharge Defendant’s probation early. This is impermissible. See Baker v. State, 619 So. 2d 411, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (striking special condition providing the defendant could not be considered for early termination of probation “because a trial judge is not authorized to divest the Department of Corrections of its authority to recommend early termination of probation” or “empowered to prevent the circuit court in the future from exercising its authority to discharge a probationer”); Jones v. State, 666 So. 2d 191, 192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (striking condition which prohibited early termination of probation until the probationer completed a sex offender program because the condition was impermissibly calculated to divest the Department of Corrections of its authority to recommend early termination of probation and, consequently, to prevent the circuit court in the future from exercising its authority to discharge the probationer).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to strike the condition of probation prohibiting early termination of probation without the State’s approval. We otherwise affirm Defendant’s conviction and sentence.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
WARNER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.