JAMES GATES, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Lawson v. State, 969 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2007)
  …t him or her to revocation. We agree with the Fifth District that a condition of probation should “provide reasonable individuals of common intelligence the basis to know and understand its meaning.” Lawson, 941 So. 2d at 489; accord Britt v. State, 775 So. 2d 415, 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (stating that two probation conditions were “sufficiently precise to ‘give [ ] a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of what constitutes forbidden conduct.’ ”) (quoting Brown v. State, 629 So. 2d 841, 842 (Fla.1994))…
• Lawson v. State, 941 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
  …t the view that fair notice can be satisfied by conditions of probation that provide reasonable individuals of common intelligence the basis to know and understand its meaning. See Ertley v. State, 785 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Britt v. State, 775 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Under this view, conditions of probation do not have to be precise to the point of obtrusiveness in order to afford fair notice to the probationer and, therefore, it is not necessary for the sentencing court to cata-logue each a…
• Ertley v. State, 785 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
  …sections 948.03(5)(a)(l), (a)(10), (b)(2) and (b)(3) were not rationally related to the offense and that subsections 948.03(5)(a)(10), (b)(1) and (b)(3) constituted unlawful delegations of judicial authority to probation officers. In Britt v. State, 775 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), this court rejected appellant’s void-for-vagueness challenge to the conditions contained in subsections 948.03(5)(a)(2) and (a)(6). All the other arguments appellant raises, with the exception of his challenge to the condition s…

Authorities Cited

• Gissendanner v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)
• Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)