JORDAN RICHTER, 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.
Jordan Richter appealed the revocation of his probation for failing to document completion of 100 hours of community service. The court reversed, holding that the failure to document did not constitute a willful and substantial violation of probation where Richter actually completed the service hours and made reasonable efforts to comply.
The trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation because: (1) documentation of community service hours was not an express condition of probation; and (2) even if it were a violation, it cannot be deemed substantial or willful where the probationer actually performed the service and made reasonable efforts to comply.
[1] A probation violation is not willful when a probationer makes reasonable efforts to comply with a condition of probation.
[2] Failure to document community service hours, when the hours themselves were completed, does not constitute a willful and substantial violation of probation.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Where a probationer makes reasonable efforts to comply with a condition of probation, violation of the condition cannot be deemed 'willful.'”
Establishes the legal standard for willful violation—requires not just breach but lack of reasonable efforts to comply
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn April 12, 1995, Richter pleaded guilty to burglary of a conveyance and grand theft of a motor vehicle. The court withheld adjudication, placed him …
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 Burden Of Proof In Probation Violation Hearings cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Judge.
Jordan Richter has appealed from the trial court’s order revoking his probation. Because Richter’s failure to document his community service hours did not constitute a “willful and substantial” violation of probation, we reverse.
On April 12, 1995, Richter pleaded guilty to burglary of a conveyance and grand theft of a motor vehicle. The court entered judgment, withheld adjudication, placed Richter on concurrent three-year probationary terms for each offense, and ordered him to complete 100 hours of community service work. Subsequently, a Department of Corrections probation officer filed an affidavit asserting that Richter violated his probation by failing to document that he had completed his 100 hours of community service work. The probation officer’s supervisor refused to sign or approve the affidavit.
At an earlier hearing, the probation supervisor had testified that Richter had completed his community service hours but had not obtained any documentation to that effect. A combination of circumstances led to this omission, including the probation supervisor’s six-week absence from his office. Further exacerbating this administrative problem was the poor relationship between Richter and his father, who actually thwarted his son’s efforts to produce the paperwork.
The record reveals that Richter, in addition to performing community service, maintained employment and was permitted to graduate with his high school class. He narrowly missed passing the GED. Never theless, the trial court found that the failure to document the service hours constituted a willful and substantial violation of his probation conditions. In so doing, the court abused its discretion.
First, documentation of community service hours was not an actual condition of probation. Although it may have been implied, it was not expressly stated in condition (n). Second, even if failure to document were a violation, it cannot be considered substantial when one compares that omission with the actual performance of the 100 hours of service. “Where a probationer makes reasonable efforts to comply with a condition of probation, violation of the condition cannot be deemed ‘willful.’ ” Van Wagner v. State, 677 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). As in Rowan v. State, 696 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), the state has not carried its burden of proving a willful and substantial violation of probation by the greater weight of the evidence.
Reversed.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Burse v. State, 724 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…n order to require a revocation of probation. See Wagland v. State, 705 So. 2d 1016, 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Where a probationer makes a good faith attempt to comply with a condition of probation, any violation is not willful. See Richter v. State, 697 So. 2d 939, 939 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Burse stated that he attempted to provide Officer Spurlock a copy of his lease, but Burse’s landlord was on vacation. Burse did provide his landlord’s telephone number and the date the landlord was to return. Although Burse…
-
King v. State, 915 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…completed his community service was witness Mary Doan’s and King’s testimony that he did. The State failed to meet its burden of proving a willful and substantial violation of condition 27 by the greater weight of the evidence. See Richter v. State, 697 So. 2d 939, 940 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (“First, documentation of community service hours was not an actual condition of probation. Although it may have been implied, it was not expressly stated in condition (n). Second, even if failure to document were a violation…
-
Bryant v. State, 931 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…tion 27 requires the probationer to actually perform the community service work. “[D]oeumentation of community service hours was not an actual condition of probation.” King v. State, 915 So. 2d 764, 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); see also Richter v. State, 697 So. 2d 939, 940 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Thus, Bryant’s failure to submit documentation of his community service hours cannot support a finding that he violated condition 27 of his probation, which requires only actual performance of the work itself. Despite the f…
Authorities Cited
- VAN Wagner v. State, 677 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Rowan v. State, 696 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)