RONNIE UPSHAW, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in revoking probation because the state conceded insufficient evidence of willfulness for the alleged violations.
Appellant was charged with violating probation by driving with an expired tag and without a valid license. The trial judge found him guilty only of vi…
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 Willful And Substantial Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
[*688] PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Ronnie Upshaw, contends the trial court erred in revoking his probation. We agree and reverse.
At the conclusion of the revocation hearing the trial judge found appellant guilty only of violating “condition five” of the terms of his probation. Condition five states that the person on probation must not violate any law. Appellant was charged with violating condition five by driving a motor vehicle with an expired license tag and without a valid driver’s license.
To use these offenses to violate probation, they must be shown to be willful and substantial. The state has conceded that there was insufficient evidence presented at the revocation hearing to demonstrate that appellant’s driving without a valid driver’s license and with an expired license tag was willful. Inasmuch as the trial judge found appellant guilty only of violating that condition of his probation and in light of the state’s concession, we must reverse and remand with instructions that appellant’s probation be reinstated.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and HALL and BLUE, JJ., concur.