LORI ANN BOURGET, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed restitution and probation conditions for insurance fraud conviction but reversed probation conditions prohibiting firearm possession and excessive intoxicant use as unrelated to the offense.
Special probation conditions prohibiting firearm possession and excessive intoxicant use are invalid when unrelated to the offense of conviction and not criminal activities.
[1] Special conditions of probation must be related to the offense of conviction and future criminality; conditions prohibiting firearm possession and excessive intoxicant us…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLori Bourget was convicted of insurance fraud and making a false report to law enforcement. She was sentenced to restitution of $11,210 jointly and se…
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 Insurance Fraud cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Lori Bourget appeals from her sentence for insurance fraud and making a false report to law enforcement and contends that the trial court erred in imposing restitution and probation conditions. We determine that the trial court acted within its discretion in making Bourget jointly and severally ha-ble with the other codefendants for the $11,-210 restitution award. See Spivey v. State, 531 So. 2d 965 (Fla.1988). Although Bourget testified that she could not afford to pay restitution, we agree with the trial court’s determination that she could afford to make a small monthly payment. We note that the trial court cannot revoke her probation for an inability to pay if she makes a bona fide effort to obtain the necessary resources. See Nix v. State, 604 So. 2d 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
Bourget correctly argues, however, that the special conditions of probation which prohibit her from possessing firearms and using intoxicants excessively are invalid. The conditions (1) are unrelated to the insurance fraud, (2) are not criminal activities, and (3) do not relate to future criminality. See Biller v. State, 618 So. 2d 734 (Fla.1993). Therefore, we strike special conditions (4) and (7) of Bourget’s probation.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and FULMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
I.M. a child v. State, 917 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…So. 2d 965 (Fla.1988) (acknowledging trial court’s discretion to require defendant to pay full amount of restitution, or apportion restitution in appropriate amount, where defendant commits criminal offense in concert with others); Bourget v. State, 634 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (finding no abuse of discretion in trial court’s making defendant jointly and severally liable with co-defendants in imposing restitution). At the conclusion of the second day of the restitution proceedings, defense counsel object…
Authorities Cited
- Biller v. State, 618 So. 2d 734 (Fla. 1993)
- Spivey v. State, 531 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 1988)
- Quinton NIX v. State, 604 So. 2d 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)