MAURICE W. SAGNER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Competent Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Maurice W. Sagner appeals from the trial court’s order revoking his probation. We reverse.
The affidavit of violation of probation charged that appellant violated Condition 5 of his probation, which required him to live and remain at liberty without violating any law, by committing a battery upon a named person “on or about July 6, 1999.” The State presented only hearsay evidence that appellant committed a qualifying offense and that it occurred during the probationary period. The introduction of the certified copy of the February 21, 2000 judgment of conviction for aggravated battery did not state the date of the battery or the name of the victim and did not furnish competent evidence that the offense occurred during the probationary period. A revocation of probation cannot stand on hearsay evidence alone. See Render v. State, 755 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Anderson v. State, 711 So. 2d-106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Accordingly we reverse the trial court’s order revoking appellant’s probation.
REVERSED.
DELL, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
M.M. v. State, 839 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…the trial court neither orally pronounced nor made written findings as to which violation the child was found guilty. Aidone v. State, 763 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Second, the evidence consisted only of inadmissible hearsay. Sagner v. State, 776 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (revocation of probation cannot stand on hearsay evidence alone). Third, no foundation was laid for an exception to the hearsay rule. Cf. Russell v. State, 801 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (affirming the revocation of probation…
-
Critsley v. State, 846 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…ow all instructions given to him by his probation officer.1 It is undisputed that hearsay evidence, while admissible in probation revocation proceedings, cannot constitute the sole basis for a finding of violation of probation. See Sagner v. State, 776 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Render v. State, 755 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). However, a revocation can be grounded on hearsay evidence combined with evidence which is admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule. See Render, 755 So. 2d at 653. In th…
-
Lewis v. State, 995 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…ecord exception to the hearsay rule.” Id.; see § 90.803(8), Fla. Stat. (2007). The trial court correctly concluded that the State had failed to adduce non-hearsay evidence sufficient to establish the alleged new law violations. See Sagner v. State, 776 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); see also Purvis v. State, 397 So. 2d 746, 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). The trial court erred, however, when it found the defendant had violated probation by failing to report an alleged arrest that was not established by non-hearsay…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Render v. State, 755 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)