KELVIN CARTWRIGHT, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Matthews v. State, 736 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
  …defendants to the possibility of an unintentional violation. Oliver v. State, 672 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (condition that explicitly prohibited a defendant from having “contact with minor children” was impermissibly broad); Lambert v. State, 635 So. 2d 93, 93-94 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (condition which provided the defendant “have no contact with children under age 10” was too broad); Swatzell v. State, 691 So. 2d 594, 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (condition which provided “defendant have no contact with anyon…
• Rowles v. State, 682 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
  …nintentional violation should he subsequently be [*1185] inadvertently placed in a work or social situation where young girls are present, without their parents or guardians. See Graham v. State, 658 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Lambert v. State, 635 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). We remand this cause to the trial court to revisit and refashion this condition, in order to minimize any inadvertent violation. Perhaps a condition that prohibits intentional, unsupervised contact with a female child under age…
• Lambert v. State, 635 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …e only condition of probation appellant raised as error. We reverse this condition because it is too broad. The condition of probation must be more specific so that appellant cannot be charged with an unintentional violation of it. Lambert v. State, 635 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); see Dean v. State, 629 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). [*1057] AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. GLICKSTEIN, GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

• State v. Phillips, 575 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)