JUAN GONZALEZ, 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.
Court reversed the stolen vehicle violation finding because hearsay testimony alone was insufficient, but affirmed the failure to file reports violation and remanded for reconsideration of revocation based on remaining violations.
Hearsay evidence standing alone is insufficient to establish a probation violation, even though hearsay is admissible in probation revocation hearings.
[1] Hearsay evidence, though admissible in probation revocation hearings, is insufficient standing alone to establish a violation of a probation condition.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Hearsay, though admissible in a probation revocation hearing, is insufficient standing alone to establish a violation of a condition of probation.”
Court stating the governing legal standard for hearsay evidence in probation violation proceedings.
Appellant Gonzalez was charged with violating probation by possessing a stolen vehicle and failing to file monthly reports. The only evidence of the v…
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 Evidentiary Sufficiency cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the finding that appellant violated his probation by possessing a stolen vehicle. At the violation of probation hearing, the only evidence that the vehicle was stolen was the arresting officer’s testimony about the teletype report. This was hearsay. “Hearsay, though admissible in a probation revocation hearing, is insufficient standing alone to establish a violation of a condition of probation.” Wilcox v. State, 770 So. 2d 733, 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); accord Render v. State, 755 So. 2d 653, 654 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
We affirm the trial court’s finding that appellant violated his probation for failing to file monthly reports.
The record does not reflect whether the trial court would have revoked appellant’s probation based only on the failure to file monthly reports. We therefore remand to the trial court to reconsider its revocation and sentence based upon the remaining violations and to make a determination of whether appellant had the ability to pay regarding the failure to pay restitution. See Thompson v. State, 710 So. 2d 80, 82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). If the trial court chooses to revoke appellant’s probation for the remaining violation(s), it must enter a written order of revocation.
POLEN, C.J., STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tobias v. State, 828 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…ed the case on the months that the defendant failed to report. The defendant argues, and we agree, that the only evidence on this claim was hearsay. An allegation based solely on hearsay cannot be the basis for a finding of guilt. Gonzalez v. State, 814 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Probation office records concerning the defendant’s history of reporting might have been admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, but the State did not choose to introduce them. The finding of guilt o…
-
Fleitas v. State, 835 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…ty to correct any error.”), citing Castor v. State, 365 So. 2d 701, 703 (Fla.1978). A probation violation hearing is subject to the same Florida Evidence Code as any other hearing with the exception that hearsay is admissible. See Gonzalez v. State, 814 So. 2d 1210, 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- C.A. Burnette v. Grove Isle Club, Inc., 710 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- M.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 770 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Render v. State, 755 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)