JULIUS TAYLOR, 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.
Julius Taylor appealed the revocation of his probation for aggravated assault and battery, challenging the trial judge's finding that he willfully violated four probation conditions. The appellate court reversed because the evidence did not support findings that three of the four violations were willful.
The trial judge's finding of willful violations regarding anger management classes, community service, and psychological evaluation was not supported by sufficient evidence. However, sufficient evidence supported the finding regarding failure to file monthly reports. The case was remanded for the trial judge to determine whether probation revocation would have occurred based solely on the monthly reporting violation.
[1] A finding of willful violation of probation requires sufficient evidentiary support in the record.
[2] A defendant's failure to complete probation conditions is not willful when the defendant testifies they were not directed on how to complete them and probation officers d…
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“Because no evidence in the record supports the trial judge's finding regarding the willful nature of three of the four violations found by the trial judge, we reverse.”
The court's core holding establishing that insufficient evidence supported three of the four violations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTaylor was adjudged guilty of aggravated assault and battery and sentenced to five years probation. He was later alleged to have violated probation in…
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 Willful And Substantial Violation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, J.
The appellant challenges the trial judge’s revocation of his probation and the sentence imposed in connection with the revocation. Because no evidence in the record supports the trial judge’s finding regarding the willful nature of three of the four violations found by the trial judge, we reverse.
The appellant was adjudged guilty of aggravated assault and battery and placed on five years probation. It was thereafter alleged in an affidavit of violation of probation that the appellant violated his probation in various respects. Following a hearing, the trial judge announced his finding that the appellee had proved only four willful violations of conditions of the appellant’s probation: conditions requiring him to report monthly, to undergo a psychological evaluation, to perform community service, and to attend an anger management class. Based upon these four violations, the judge revoked the appellant’s probation and imposed a prison sentence.
Although the record demonstrates a sufficient evidentiary basis for the trial judge’s determination regarding the appellant’s failure to file monthly reports, we agree with the appellant’s argument that there was not a sufficient evidentiary basis for the trial judge’s finding that the other violations were willful. At the revocation hearing, the appellant testified that he did not attend an anger management course, perform his community service, or undergo psychological evaluation because he had never been directed by either of his probation officers as to how or where to do these things, and he did not know how to do them on his own. Testimony from the probation officers did not contradict the appellant’s testimony in this regard. The appellant’s failure to have completed these conditions at the time of the final hearing was not willful under these circumstances, especially in light of the fact that over four years of his five-year term of probation remained at the time the affidavit of violation was filed.
The judge did not indicate whether he would have revoked the appellant’s probation and imposed the same sentence solely because of the appellant’s failure to file monthly reports. We accordingly reverse the order of revocation of probation, vacate the sentence imposed upon revocation of probation, and remand this case for reconsideration of the revocation and sen tencing decisions. See Jenkins v. State, 691 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
LAWRENCE and BENTON, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riddle v. State, 755 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…me because of a problem at work. The state also failed to rebut appellant’s claim that he paged his community control officer, as she had asked him to do in the past, when he feared that he might be late and she did not respond. See Taylor v. State, 734 So. 2d 1171, 1172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)(re-versing the order of revocation because the defendant’s uncontradicted testimony did not establish that he willfully violated three of the four conditions); see also Thomas v. State, 672 So. 2d 587, 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 199…
-
Monroe v. State, 953 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…he trial court would have revoked appellant’s probation and imposed the same sentence based solely on a violation of condition 7. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for reconsideration of the revocation and sentencing decisions. See Taylor v. State, 734 So. 2d 1171, 1172-73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions. ALLEN, WEBSTER, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.…
-
Nichols v. State, 747 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…3 So. 2d 575, 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). The evidence here failed to establish that Mr. Nichols willfully violated his probation. The record contains no evidence that Ms. Paramore directed Mr. Nichols to perform community service. See Taylor v. State, 734 So. 2d 1171, 1172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Green v. State, 620 So. 2d 1126, 1130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Under the terms of the condition of probation, Mr. Nichols was to perform community service as directed by his probation officer. Although the probation officer co…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Owens v. State, 691 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Montemus Jenkins, II v. State, 691 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)