CHAVIS JEAN-MARIE, 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.
It was fundamental error to revoke probation in a case where neither the affidavit of violation nor the warrant alleged a violation in that specific case.
The defendant was placed on probation in two cases. The probation officer filed an affidavit of violation and an arrest warrant for only one case. The…
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 Affidavit Of Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals his revocation of probation in two separate case numbers. We affirm one and reverse the other. The trial court placed the defendant on probation in 1999 in two eases, lower case numbers 99-8348 and 99-8820. Each case number had a separate order of supervision of probation. The probation officer filed an affidavit of violation listing only case number 99-8348. The subsequent arrest warrant in the record listed only case number 99-8348. At the revocation hearing, the State pursued revocation in both case numbers, and the defendant contested the merits of the violations but did not object to the additional violation count. When pronouncing sentence, the trial court examined the warrant and then revoked probation in both cases.
On the record before us, both the affidavit and the warrant alleged violation in case number 99-8348 only. We hold that it was fundamental error to revoke probation in case number 99-8820 where neither the affidavit of violation nor the warrant alleged a violation in that case. The trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter revocation in that case without a charging document. Therefore, we affirm the revocation in case number 99-8348 but reverse the revocation in case number 99-8820. Upon remand, the trial court may reconsider entering revocation if the State files the proper affidavit and warrant.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
GUNTHER, FARMER, JJ„ and STREITFELD, JEFFREY E., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tucker v. State, 873 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…mbers were never included in any of the affidavits and amended affidavits of violation of probation, nor the warrants, that led to the revocation of her community supervision in the other cases. The State concedes this fact. See Jean-Marie v. State, 833 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Accordingly, we reverse Tucker’s judgments and sentences in case numbers 98-7951 and 00-976. As the State points out, “[u]pon remand, the trial court may reconsider entering revocation if the State files the proper affidavit and…
-
Nelson v. State, 16 So. 3d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…on in the three cases for which no affidavit of violation of probation was filed. It is fundamental error to revoke probation in a case when the State fails to allege a violation of probation for that particular case number. See Jean-Marie v. State, 833 So. 2d 870, 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). In Jean-Marie, the trial court revoked probation in two cases although the affidavit of violation listed only one case number. The Fourth District held “that it was fundamental error to revoke probation in case number 99-8…