ROY LEE SINGLETON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Roy Lee Singleton appealed the revocation of his probation. The appellate court affirmed the finding that Singleton violated probation but remanded the case for correction of the written revocation order to conform to the trial court's oral pronouncements and to remove unsupported findings regarding the cost of supervision.
The court affirmed the finding that Singleton violated probation, but remanded because: (1) the finding regarding failure to pay the cost of supervision lacked evidentiary support regarding Singleton's ability to pay and must be struck; and (2) the written order must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncements by adding the findings regarding false names and resisting arrest and removing the unsupported findings regarding court costs and restitution.
[1] A trial court's written order revoking probation must conform to its oral pronouncements.
[2] A finding of probation violation for failure to pay costs of supervision requires evidence of the defendant's ability to pay.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the trial court erred by finding that the defendant violated his probation by failing to pay the cost of supervision where there was no evidence adduced at trial as to the defendant's ability to pay”
Establishes that probation violation findings regarding failure to pay require evidentiary support on the defendant's ability to pay
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAt a probation violation hearing, the trial court orally found that Singleton violated his probation by failing to pay the cost of supervision and by …
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 Ability To Pay cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Roy' Lee Singleton, appeals from an order revoking his probation. We affirm the finding that the defendant violated his probation, but remand for correction of the written order revoking probation.
At the close of the probation violation hearing, the trial court found that the defendant violated his probation by failing to pay the cost of supervision and by committing the offenses of giving a' false name and resisting arrest without violence. The trial court’s written order revoking probation, however, provides that the defendant violated his probation by failing to report to his probation officer on a monthly basis, and by failing to pay court costs, restitution, and the cost of supervision.
The defendant contends, and the State properly concedes, that the trial court erred by finding that the defendant violated his probation by failing to pay the cost of supervision where there was ho evidence adduced at trial as to the defendant’s ability to pay. See Robinson v. State, 773 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), review dismissed, 02-180, 817 So. 2d 849 (Fla. Apr. 3, 2002); Holt v. State, 385 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Therefore,-the cause is remanded for the purpose of striking the trial court’s finding that, the defendant violated probation by failing to pay the cost of supervision.
Next, as the State properly concedes, the written order revoking probation must conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncements. See Leiva v. State, 814 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Sellers v. State, 793 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Jefferson v. State, 732 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Therefore, this cause is remanded for entry of a corrected order striking the trial court’s findings that the defendant violated probation by failing to pay court costs' and restitution, and adding the trial court’s oral pronouncement that the defendant violated probation by committing the offenses of providing false names to officers and resisting arrest without violence.
The remaining contentions raised by the defendant' lack merit.
Affirmed and remanded for correction of the written order of revocation of probation.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Singleton v. State, 860 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…his is the second appearance of the appeal in this court. The initial appeal from the revocation order raised other grounds and was affirmed but remanded for correction of an error in the written order of revocation of probation. Singleton v. State, 820 So. 2d 404, 405 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Subsequently defendant-appellant Singleton filed a petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failure to raise the issue of vindictive sentencing. This court granted a belated appeal on that issue, see…
Authorities Cited
- Robinson v. State, 773 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Holt v. State, 385 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. COX, 732 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Rooney v. Lawrence E. Hannon, M.D., P.A., 732 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Sellers v. State, 793 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Darrel P. Gibbs v. State, 793 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Leiva v. State, 814 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Bryant Lewis v. State, 814 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)