LAMAR DAVIS, 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.
This case addresses whether a probationer can be revoked based solely on judicial notice of a sheriff's deputy's affidavit from a separate case, without the affiant's testimony. The court held that hearsay evidence, even when judicially noticed, cannot constitute the sole basis for probation revocation.
No. While hearsay evidence is admissible in probation revocation proceedings, it cannot constitute the sole basis for a finding of violation of probation. Judicial notice of documents does not render them non-hearsay, and the affidavit from the separate case constituted inadmissible hearsay insufficient to support the revocation.
[1] Hearsay evidence, while admissible in probation revocation proceedings, cannot constitute the sole basis for a finding of violation of probation.
[2] Judicial notice of documents filed in a separate case does not render those documents non-hearsay for the purpose of a probation revocation hearing.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“It is well established that hearsay evidence, while admissible in probation revocation proceedings, cannot constitute the sole basis for a finding of violation of probation.”
Establishes the governing legal principle that hearsay alone is insufficient for probation revocation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavis was on probation when the trial judge took judicial notice of affidavits and reports from a Lake County court file in a separate armed robbery c…
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 Admissibility Of Affidavits cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, J.
The issue posed by this appeal is whether a probationer (Davis) is subject to revocation solely on the basis of judicial notice taken of the affidavit of a sheriffs deputy filed in a separate case wherein Davis was charged with robbery with a firearm. The deputy affiant in that case did not testify at the probation revocation hearing. It is well established that hearsay evidence, while admissible in probation revocation proceedings, cannot constitute the sole basis for a finding of violation of probation. McFarland v. State, 764 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
The argument of the appellant, which is not factually controverted by the state, is as follows:
Judge Hill stated that the “affidavits and reports contained” in a Lake County court file indicated that Mr. Davis had confessed to committing armed robbery. In Jones v. State, 423 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), this Honorable Court found that a defendant’s own statements, admissible as a hearsay exception, could serve as the sole basis for revoking his probation. In that case, however, the State produced the deputy to whom the alleged admission was actually made to testify at Jones’s hearing. See Footnote 1 (“For example, the deputy testified that Jones told him ... ”). The fact that Judge Hill took judicial notice in this case of the charging affidavits from a different case filed in the same criminal court did not render the documents non-hearsay. See, e.g., Stoll v. State, 762 So. 2d 870 (Fla.2000) (a handwritten statement by a domestic violence victim was not admissible or an exception to the hearsay rule merely because the statement was “part of the court records”).
The state acknowledges that the affidavit relied upon by the trial court constitutes hearsay. We agree with the appellant that the evidence indicating his involvement in a robbery was entirely hearsay and thus insufficient to support a finding of probation violation.1
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PETERSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur. . We note that the revocation judgment, although correctly styled, erroneously refers to Davis as "James Leonard Carter" and also refers to a plea of guilty as opposed to a controverted hearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Grannemann v. State, 85 So. 3d 1186 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…[*1187] ing that his probation officer had been told by the treating facility that he had been unsuccessfully discharged from its program. Such evidence is insufficient in itself to support a finding of a violation of probation. See Davis v. State, 831 So. 2d 792, 793 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Further, the State failed to offer any evidence that Grannemann was “in some manner responsible” for his discharge from drug treatment. See Rubio v. State, 824 So. 2d 1020, 1022 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“When a defendant’s prob…
-
Crawford v. State, 240 So. 3d 894 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…uments into evidence.1 While the trial court correctly noted that hearsay, such as an arrest affidavit, is admissible in a violation of probation hearing, a finding of violation of probation cannot be supported by hearsay alone. See Davis v. State, 831 So. 2d 792, 793 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). The State argues that it presented some non-hearsay testimony at the hearing and therefore sufficient evidence supported the finding that Crawford violated probation. The State points to the alleged victim's testimony that…
-
Crawford v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…ents into evidence.1 While the trial court correctly noted that hearsay, such as an arrest affidavit, is admissible in a violation of probation hearing, a finding of violation of probation cannot be supported by hearsay alone. See Davis v. State, 831 So. 2d 792, 793 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). The State argues that it presented some non-hearsay testimony at the hearing and therefore sufficient evidence supported the finding that Crawford violated probation. The State points to the alleged victim’s testimony th…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Stoll v. State, 762 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 2000)
- Jillette Jones v. State, 423 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- McFARLAND v. State, 764 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)