ALPHONSO L. JOHNSON, 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 a condition of community control requiring gainful employment of at least 35 hours per week was invalid as it did not account for circumstances beyond the defendant's control. The court modified the condition to require faithful work and seeking full-time employment if working less than 35 hours.
[1] A condition of community control requiring gainful employment of a specific number of hours per week is invalid if it does not account for circumstances beyond the defend…
[2] A condition of community control may be modified to require the defendant to work faithfully at suitable employment insofar as possible, and to seek full-time employment…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was sentenced to community control with a condition requiring gainful employment of no less than 35 hours per week. The defendant appeal…
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 Community Control Conditions cases and more on FLexlaw
DIAMANTIS, Judge.
Appealing his sentence of community control, Alphonso L. Johnson contends that the trial court erred by imposing invalid conditions of community control. We affirm Johnson’s sentence, but we modify one of the conditions.
The trial court imposed the following as a condition of Johnson’s community control:
(m) You must be gainfully employed no less than 35 hours per week, if unemployed, you will seek employment on a daily basis as directed by the probation officer. In imposing this condition, the trial court has required Johnson either to work 35 hours per week or, if unemployed, to seek employment on a daily basis. This condition fails to take into account the possibility that Johnson could be employed but could work less than 35 hours per week. If this event should occur due to events beyond his control, Johnson technically would be in violation of this special condition of his community control.
In Armstrong v. State, 620 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), we held that the trial court erred in requiring the defendant, as a special condition of probation, to maintain full-time and part-time employment because economic conditions beyond the defendant’s control could prevent him from completing such a condition. Based upon the reasoning set forth in Armstrong, we modify the special condition on Johnson’s community control to read, pursuant to section 948.03(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1993):
You shall work faithfully at suitable employment insofar as possible; and, if you are working less than 35 hours a week, you shall seek full-time employment as directed by the probation officer. Johnson’s challenges to two other conditions of his community control are without merit. The trial court, both orally at sentencing and in writing, properly required that Johnson submit a schedule of his activities to his probation officer. Also, the imposition of statutory costs was proper. See State v. Beasley, 580 So. 2d 139 (Fla.1991).
Accordingly, we affirm Johnson’s sentence of community control as modified.
Sentence AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vezina v. State, 644 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…is invalid. White v. State, 619 So. 2d 429, 431 (Fla. 1st DCA) (appellant’s failure to obtain and maintain full-time employment within 30 days of sentencing was invalid condition of probation), rev. den., 626 So. 2d 208 (Fla.1993); Johnson v. State, 636 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (requirement that appellant be gainfully employed no fewer than 35 hours a week imper-missibly failed to account for possibility that unavoidable outside events could restrict employment options to fewer than 35 hours a week); Ev…
-
Spruill v. State, 643 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…ntrol of Spruill’s movements from his probation officer to the state'attorney’s office. Spruill also objects to the special condition requiring him to find and maintain employment for 60 hours per week. On the [*1193] authority of Johnson v. State, 636 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), and Armstrong v. State, 620 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), we modify special conditions 30, 31, and 32 of the community control order, and conditions 29, 30, and 32 of the probation order, to require that: You shall work fait…
-
Burke v. State, 642 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…requiring the defendant, as a special condition of probation, to maintain full-time and part-time employment because economic conditions beyond the defendant’s control could prevent him from complying with this condition. See also Johnson v. State, 636 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). Based upon the reasoning set forth in Armstrong and Johnson, we modify this special condition of probation to require Burke to work faithfully at suitable employment insofar as may be possible. See § 948.03(l)(c), Fla.Stat. (Sup…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Beasley, 580 So. 2d 139 (Fla. 1991)
- Armstrong v. State, 620 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)