JERRY GREEN, 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 manslaughter conviction but struck certain probation conditions that were not orally pronounced at sentencing, including restrictions on weapon possession and intoxicant use, while preserving the statutory prohibition on felon firearm possession.
Probation and community control conditions that restrict weapon possession and intoxicant use must be orally pronounced at sentencing to be enforceable, except for statutory prohibitions on felon firearm possession.
[1] Probation conditions restricting weapon possession and intoxicant use are unenforceable when not orally pronounced at sentencing, but statutory prohibitions on felon fire…
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 intelligenceGreen was convicted of manslaughter with a weapon and sentenced to probation with community control conditions, including restrictions on possessing w…
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 Manslaughter With A Weapon cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Chief Judge.
The appellant challenges his judgment and sentence for manslaughter with a weapon. We affirm the conviction in all respects. We affirm the sentence, but strike certain conditions of probation and community control that were not orally pronounced at sentencing.
The appellant challenges condition (4) contained in his probation and community control orders which provides: “[y]ou will neither possess, carry or own any weapons or firearm without first securing the consent of your Probation Officer.” He also challenges that portion of condition (6) that provides “[y]ou will not use intoxicants to excess.” Because the trial court failed to orally pronounce these conditions at sentencing, we strike that portion of condition (4) that prohibits the possession or ownership of any weapons, and that portion of condition (6) that prohibits the excessive use of intoxicants. See Hart v. State, 651 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We affirm the portion of condition (4) that prohibits the appellant from possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. § 709.23, Fla.Stat. (1993). We strike the portion of condition (4) that implies a probation officer may consent to the appellant’s possession of a firearm. 651 So. 2d at 114. We certify to the Florida Supreme Court as a matter of great public importance the question previously certified in Hart v. State, 651 So. 2d 112,113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Affirmed; probation conditions stricken, and question certified.
PARKER and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.