BILLY WAYNE DANIELS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1996-03-27
No. 95-833
BOOTH, BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
680 So. 2d 490 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from Appellant’s judgment and sentence after vio lation of community control. The lower court found that Appellant had violated three conditions of his community control, to wit: Condition (5), live without violating the law; Condition (8), work diligently at a lawful occupation; and Condition (12), remain confined to his approved residence. We strike the lower court’s findings that Appellant violated conditions (5) and (8), as they were not supported by any evidence other than hearsay. See Scott v. State, 446 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), and Vezina v. State, 644 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We hold that there was sufficient evidence to support the finding that Appellant violated the condition requiring him to remain at his residence. See Porras v. State, 651 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Since we cannot determine from the record whether the lower court would have revoked community control based solely on the remaining valid violation, we REVERSE and REMAND for reconsideration. Gavins v. State, 587 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).

BOOTH, BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Montemus Jenkins, II v. State, 691 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
    …hich terms of probation appellant violated. Because we cannot determine from the record whether the trial court would have revoked probation based solely on the remaining valid violations, we REVERSE and REMAND for reconsideration. Daniels v. State, 680 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Gavins v. State, 587 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). MINER, ALLEN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.…
  • Dixon v. State, 789 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
    …e Department of Corrections, based on the battery charge alone. Accordingly, we reverse the revocation order and remand the case to the trial court for further consideration. See Jenkins v. State, 691 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Daniels v. State, 680 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). BOOTH, KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw