MICHAEL SWATZELL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Special Conditions Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Michael Swatzell appeals his sentence asserting error in a special condition of probation imposed by the trial court. Based on the state’s proper confession of error, we strike the following special condition of probation: that defendant have no contact with anyone under 18 years of age unless supervised by someone over the age of 25. This condition is impermissibly broad because the possibility of unintentional violation exists. See Rowles v. State, 682 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Oliver v. State, 672 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Graham v. State, 658 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). We, therefore, strike the condition and remand the ease to the trial court to rephrase the condition in a manner that minimizes the potential for inadvertent violations.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Matthews v. State, 736 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…nt from having “contact with minor children” was impermissibly broad); Lambert v. State, 635 So. 2d 93, 93-94 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (condition which provided the defendant “have no contact with children under age 10” was too broad); Swatzell v. State, 691 So. 2d 594, 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (condition which provided “defendant have no contact with anyone under 18 years of age unless supervised by someone over the age of 25” was impermissibly broad); Rowles v. State, 682 So. 2d 1184, 1184-1185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…
-
Manon v. State, 740 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…or children, knowing that such contact was forbidden by the probation order. In support of. his argument defendant cites several cases in which courts have reversed similar probationary conditions on the basis of overbreadth. See Swatzell v. State, 691 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)(condition that defendant have “no contact with anyone under 18 years of age unless supervised by someone over 25 years of age,” overbroad because the possibility of unintentional violation exists; remanded to rephrase the conditio…
-
Wagland v. State, 705 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…special condition at issue to minimize the potential for unintentional violations. See Watkins v. State, 666 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (probation condition barring contact with children under the age of sixteen is too broad); Swatzell v. State, 691 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1997)(striking special condition prohibiting unsupervised contact with children under the age of eighteen as impermissibly broad because of possibility of unintentional violation); Rowles v. State, 682 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)(p…
Authorities Cited
- Matos v. Budget Rent A CAR Sys., Inc., 658 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Rowles v. State, 682 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Oliver v. State, 672 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)