ANDREW MITCHELL, A/K/A EDGAR LEE BUNTON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1992-05-12
No. 91-1733
Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and COPE, JJ.
598 So. 2d 274 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Andrew Mitchell appeals an order revoking his community control. It is true, as appellant contends, that “though hearsay evidence is admissible against a probationer in a revocation proceeding, revocation may nonetheless not be based solely on hearsay.” Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180, 181 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). In this case, however, the revocation was not based solely on hearsay. The probation officer was Mitchell’s supervising officer for two months prior to the hearing, and testified from personal knowledge as to Mitchell’s failure to meet the conditions of his community control during that period of time. As the probation officer’s testimony from personal knowledge corroborated the hearsay testimony based on the unintroduced probation records, probation was properly revoked.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Rega v. State, 733 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Porras v. State, 651 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Mitchell v. State, 598 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Guardado v. State, 562 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So. 2d 387 (Fla.1991).…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw