MILTON JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1993-08-18
No. 93-399
ZEHMER, C.J., and JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
622 So. 2d 1153 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1993) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before the court after remand for resentencing. See Jones v. State, 606 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Appellant contends that the special conditions contained in the probation order should be stricken, because the conditions were not pronounced orally at the sentencing hearing when probation was reimposed. The state concedes that special probation condition eleven should be stricken, because it was not pronounced orally at the 1991 sentencing. It is the state’s view, and we agree, that appellant was on notice of the other special conditions of probation by virtue of the oral pronouncement of these conditions at the 1991 sentencing. However, in addition to special condition eleven, we have determined that special condition thirteen also must be stricken. This condition was disapproved in Martin v. State, 618 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

Accordingly, this cause is remanded with directions to strike special conditions eleven and thirteen of the probation order. In all other respects, the resentencing disposition is affirmed.

ZEHMER, C.J., and JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • R.S. v. State, 664 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
    …ATTERSON, J., concur. . We find no merit in appellant's argument that the trial court erred in advising appellant that the previously imposed conditions of community control are applicable to the newly imposed community control. See Jones v. State, 622 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Olvey v. State, 609 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).…
  • Johnson v. State, 632 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
    …entencing provision requiring him to pay $150.00 for participating in the Bay County Work Program. We have recently held that these work program costs are without legal basis. E.g., Dykes v. State, 623 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Jones v. State, 622 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Blanchette v. State, 620 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Martin v. State, 618 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Accordingly, we strike paragraph (13) of the sentencing order, the provision requir [*720] ing Appellant to pay $150.0…
  • Brown v. State, 633 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
    …entencing provision requiring him to pay $250.00 for participating in the Bay County Work Program. We have recently held that these work program costs are without legal basis. E.g., Dykes v. State, 623 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Jones v. State, 622 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Blanchette v. State, 620 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Martin v. State, 618 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Accordingly, we strike paragraph (13) of the sentencing order, the provision requiring Appellant to pay $250.00 as add…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw