CHRISTOPHER LUCAS MONROE, 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.
Monroe appealed an order revoking his probation based on an inadequate "Memo of Sentence" document. The court reversed because the memo failed to constitute a proper formal order and the record contained no evidence supporting the alleged probation violation.
A trial court cannot use a Memo of Sentence as the dispositive document in a probation revocation order; it must enter a formal, written order of violation. The order is reversed and remanded because the record contains no evidence supporting the alleged probation violation.
[1] A "Memo of Sentence" or "snapout" is an inadequate order for revocation of probation.
[2] A trial court's order revoking probation must be supported by evidence relevant to the grounds for violation alleged in the affidavit.
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“This court held as early as 1990 that such an order was an inadequate order of revocation of probation.”
Establishes that the court had long warned against using Memos of Sentence in probation revocation cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMonroe was charged with violating condition 4 of his probation (not violating the law), allegedly by committing a home invasion on March 22, 1999. The…
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 Order Of Revocation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
ALTENBERND, Acting Chief Judge.
Christopher L. Monroe appeals an order revoking his probation and sentencing him to time served. Although an error in such an order might usually be deemed moot, we conclude that this particular order requires correction.
This is another case in which the order on appeal is a “Memo of Sentence” or “snapout.” This is disturbing because this court held as early as 1990 that such an order was an inadequate order of revocation of probation. See Donley v. State, 557 So. 2d 943, 945 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). This court warned the Tenth Circuit about the continuing use of such orders months before the Tenth Circuit entered this order on August 10, 1999. See Peterson v. State, 730 So. 2d 830, 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). We issued yet another opinion, after Peterson and before the Tenth Circuit entered this order, holding Memos of Sentence inadequate to serve as orders of revocation. See Grantham v. State, 735 So. 2d 525, 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (citing Donley, 557 So. 2d 943). This Memo of Sentence states that “court found deft violated cond # 4.” Condition 4 requires that a probationer not violate the law. In this record, the only violation of condition 4 the affidavit of violation alleges is a home invasion on March 22, 1999. The record contains absolutely no evidence of such a home invasion. Apparently, an affidavit of violation of probation in another case involving Mr. Monroe alleged a different offense as a violation of condition 4. Mr. Monroe is now serving a prison sentence because he violated probation in that case.
It would appear that the trial court entered this order merely to clean up Mr. Monroe’s record, while sending him to prison in the other case. Nevertheless, the record incorrectly states that the State proved Mr. Monroe committed a home invasion.
Because the trial court used the Memo of Sentence, there is no order of violation in this case. The record contains no evidence relevant to the grounds for violation alleged in the affidavit. Thus, despite the sentence of time served, we are constrained to reverse this “Memo of Sentence” and remand to the trial court to correct its error. On remand, if the trial court finds a violation of probation, it shall enter a formal, written order of violation and shall not use a Memo of Sentence as the disposi-tive document. See Rebollar v. State, 752 So. 2d 1287, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Wagner v. State, 744 So. 2d 1155, 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Grantham, 735 So. 2d at 526.
Remanded with directions.
GREEN and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Woods v. State, 987 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…in result only. . See Abridge v. Crow, 903 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Sutton v. State, 838 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Gordon v. State, 827 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Braswell v. State, 804 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Monroe v. State, 760 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Grantham v. State, 735 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Peterson v. State, 730 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Donley v. State, 557 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). . This practice contradicts Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.986…
-
Ponce Cato v. State, 845 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ous issues exist and affirm the convictions. However, we remand for entry of a proper order of revocation of probation. We previously relinquished jurisdiction for the entry of a proper order of revocation of probation pursuant to Monroe v. State, 760 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), and Donley v. State, 557 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), because the record did not contain a written order of revocation of probation that specified the conditions of supervision that the trial court determined Cato violated. The…
-
Antoine Jelks v. State, 770 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…State, 526 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Segarra v. State, 530 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Coley v. State, 479 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We note that unusual sentencing documents may still raise jurisdictional concerns. See Monroe v. State, 760 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). See also Grantham v. State, 735 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Donley v. State, 557 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). . We note that the record in this case contains a level of disarray that is all too typical for appeals of senten…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Donley v. State, 557 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Buster Grantham v. State, 735 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Zackery Holiday v. State, 730 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Bogdanowicz v. State, 744 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Rebollar v. State, 752 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Chestnutt v. Chestnutt, 752 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)