TILDEN LEE FICHERA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Restitution Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Tilden Lee Fichera (Fichera) challenges the trial court’s restitution order on two grounds. The State concedes error on both points. We affirm in part, and remand in part.
Notwithstanding the State’s concession of error, we find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in the amount of restitution it imposed. There was competent evidence in the record supporting the assessment. We agree, however, that the trial court improperly delegated to Fiehera’s probation officer the responsibility for creating a schedule of payments consistent with his ability to pay. Briggs v. State, 647 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Bowers v. State, 596 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Smith v. State, 589 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). The restitution order must be remanded with directions to strike this language. On remand, if the trial court determines that payment of restitution in installments is appropriate, it must establish the schedule itself. See § 775.089(3), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1994).
AFFIRMED in part, and REMANDED in part for consistent proceedings.
WEBSTER, LAWRENCE and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reed v. State, 783 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…oncession but cites to no authority requiring us to do so. In fact, it has been the sound practice of Florida's courts to not accept improper concessions by the state. See, e.g., Gomez v. State, 684 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Fichara v. State, 688 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Prieto v. State, 627 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1993). As Judge Cowart said in his dissent in Matson v. State, 445 So. 2d 1121, 1122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), “a conclusory concession as to judicial error below, made by a party on appea…
-
Salonko v. State, 42 So. 3d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…el of intent. Therefore, Appellant has not shown that fundamental error occurred under this Court’s opinion in Montgomery. Because Appellant has shown no reversible error, we AFFIRM. KAHN, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur. . See Fichera v. State, 688 So. 2d 453, 453 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (affirming in part, despite the State’s concession of error); accord Strickland v. State, 437 So. 2d 150, 151-52 (Fla.1983) (acknowledging that it was erroneous to accept an improper concession of error in a prior case).…
-
Royal Palm Corporate Ctr. Ass'n, Ltd. v. Pugliese, III, 89 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…to reschedule the sales unjustifiably frustrated the rights of the plaintiffs to the sale of the foreclosed property. See Bankers Trust Co. v. Edwards, 849 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (citing Thomas); Bankers Trust Co. of Cal., N.A. v. Weidner, 688 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Chem. Mortg. Co. v. Dickson, 651 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (citing, inter alia, Thomas); A Mortg. Co. v. Bowman, 642 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (citing, inter alia, Thomas ); Admin, of Veteran’s Affairs v. Bertsche, 57…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 589 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Briggs v. State, 647 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
- Bowers v. State, 596 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)