PATRICK CHERISMA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PATRICK CHERISMA, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
789 So. 2d 1247
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2001)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s order revoking appellant’s probation. The evidence presented at the hearing supports the finding that appellant violated his probation by setting up the armed robbery of his employer. The trial court erred in finding appellant guilty of Count II of the amended violation probation affidavit, since no evidence was presented concerning that armed robbery. Nonetheless, the other armed robbery violation is more than substantial enough to warrant revocation, so we do not remand the case for reconsideration by the trial court. See Kiess v. State, 642 So. 2d 1141, 1142 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
POLEN, C.J., STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Romaine Nugent v. State, 45 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…not remand for reconsideration by the trial court. We conclude that the finding that Nugent violated his probation by committing the battery on the elderly victim is more than sufficient to warrant revocation of his probation. See Cherisma v. State, 789 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Affirmed. GROSS, C.J., and CIKLIN, J., concur.…
-
Dominek D. Grant v. State, 137 So. 3d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…based solely on either contact with his stepchildren or the hearsay account of the physical contact incident, the single violation established of battery on a law enforcement officer is substantial enough to warrant revocation.”); Cherisma v. State, 789 So. 2d 1247, 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (finding trial court erred in finding appellant guilty of one count of amended violation of probation affidavit, but affirming because “the other armed robbery violation is more than substantial enough to warrant revocation…
Authorities Cited
- Kiess v. State, 642 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)