JEAN ANTOINE, 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.
Jean Antoine was convicted of indecent assault on a child and sentenced to community control followed by probation. Six months later, the trial court revoked his community control for failure to pay court costs and failure to complete a sex offender counseling program. The appellate court reversed the revocation based on the payment obligation, finding the terms were unclear and revocation was premature, and remanded for reconsideration based solely on the counseling violation.
The court reversed the revocation based on failure to pay court costs, holding it was error because the payment terms were unclear, the revocation was premature under the community control term, the trial court failed to find Antoine had the ability to pay, and delegating payment schedule determination to the community control officer was an improper delegation of authority. The court found no error regarding the counseling violation but remanded for the trial court to reconsider revocation based solely on that remaining violation.
[1] A trial court errs in revoking community control for failure to pay court costs when the oral pronouncement of sentence is silent as to the payment schedule or time limit…
[2] The oral pronouncement of sentence controls over a written order regarding the terms of a defendant's obligations.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The terms pronounced orally control over the written order, State v. Anderson, 569 So.2d 1369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); therefore, since the oral pronouncement is silent with regard to the terms and, more specifically, does not specify either a payment schedule or a time limit for paying costs, appellant has the entire term of his community control within which to do so.”
Establishes that the oral sentencing pronouncement controls interpretation of payment obligations and Antoine had the full community control term to satisfy financial obligations.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJean Antoine was convicted of indecent assault on a child under sixteen and sentenced to two years' community control followed by eight years' probati…
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 Ability To Pay Court Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
SHAHOOD, Judge.
Appellant, Jean Antoine was convicted of indecent assault on a child under sixteen, and was sentenced to two years’ community control followed by eight years’ probation. Six months later, an affidavit and warrant were filed against him for violation of community control for failure to pay $20.89 per month towards his court costs and Victim Compensation Fund and for failure to complete a sex offender counseling program. Following a hearing, the trial court revoked appellant’s community control and sentenced him to four and one half years in prison followed by three years’ probation. We reverse and remand with directions.
Appellant was the only witness to testify at the revocation hearing. He admitted that he had not paid the costs imposed because he was experiencing financial difficulties. In addition, he testified that he had not attended the sex offender counseling program because he had language difficulties with the doctor’s program and that the doctor made no allowances for appellant’s poor English. Appellant testified that he could understand “some [English], but not everything they say.” Based on these admissions, the court revoked appellant’s community control.
The original, oral pronouncement of sentence was as follows:
The defendant to participate in Doctor Spencer’s program for sexual disorders, random urine, no volunteer work that involve[s] organization, that dealfs] with children, court costs, trust fund.
The court indicated that it would “make the determinations that are necessary with regard to defendant’s financial status” at a later date. The written order of community control reflects $50 for victim costs, $200 for trust fund, and $5 assessment “on a schedule to be determined by your community control officer.” The order also indicates that the costs of supervision were waived (i.e., “Waive COS”). No entry was made in the section entitled “Court Costs.”
We hold that, for the following reasons, it was error for the trial court to revoke community control based on appellant’s failure to pay court costs. Appellee concedes, and we agree, that the terms of appellant’s obligation to pay court costs are not clear from either the transcript of the sentencing hearing or the written order. The terms pronounced orally control over the written order, State v. Anderson, 569 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); therefore, since the oral pronouncement is silent with regard to the terms and, more specifically, does not specify either a payment schedule or a time limit for paying costs, appellant has the entire term of his community control within which to do so. See Tracy v. State, 673 So. 2d 544, 545 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Thus, it was error for the court to revoke appellant’s community control prior to the expiration of appellant’s community control term. The written order’s delegation to appellant’s community control officer of the task of determining a payment schedule is an improper delegation of authority. Id. Further, notwithstanding the fact that revocation based on failure to pay costs was premature, it was also error for the court to revoke community control without first making a finding that appellant has the ability to pay. See Allen v. State, 662 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).
We find no error in the trial court’s determination that appellant violated the condition of community control which required him to attend the sex offender counseling program. In view of our invalidation of the first ground for revocation, however, we remand to the trial court to reconsider revocation of community control based solely on the remaining violation. See Voudry v. State, 641 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
Reversed and remanded with directions.
DELL and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 738 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…des error in the finding that there was a violation of condition ten for failure to pay the fine,2 because, absent a court-imposed payment schedule, the defendant had the entire period of probation within which to pay the fine. See Antoine v. State, 684 So. 2d 266, 267 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). We remand for the trial court to decide whether the only ground for revocation properly pleaded and proven merits revocation. Reversed and remanded. DAVIS, BENTON, and PADOVANO, JJ„ CONCUR. . In fact, the second conditio…
-
Noel v. State, 127 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…ailure to pay supervision costs there must ... be a sufficient demonstration of probationer’s ability to pay and a specific finding by the court regarding that ability to pay.” (citation, quotation marks, and alterations omitted)); Antoine v. State, 684 So. 2d 266, 267 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (“[I]t was also error for the court to revoke community control without first making a finding that appellant has the ability to pay.” (citation omitted)); Allen v. State, 662 So. 2d 380, 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (“We thus co…
-
Hutchinson v. State, 801 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…ich to pay costs. “ ‘The establishment of a payment schedule for court costs is a judicial responsibility that cannot be delegated to a probation officer.’” Seders v. State, 700 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (citation omitted). See Antoine v. State, 684 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (no matter how reasonable the payment schedule may be, or how derelict the probationer in failing to pay under its terms, if such schedule is not imposed by the court, then the probationer has the entire probation term to pay the…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Allen v. State, 662 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Tracy v. State, 673 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Amaya v. State, 641 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Voudry v. State, 641 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- State v. Royce Edward Anderson, 569 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)