M. ABIGAIL IKEHARA, ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
WILLIAM L. VIANDS, JR., APPELLEE
M. ABIGAIL IKEHARA, ETC., APPELLANT,
WILLIAM L. VIANDS, JR., APPELLEE
842 So. 2d 297
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2003)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See § 737.208, Fla. Stat. (2002).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gonzales v. State, 909 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…PER CURIAM. Martin Gonzales appeals an order of revocation of probation. We affirm. Defendant-appellant Gonzales argues that the revocation of his probation was based entirely on hearsay evidence and must be reversed. See A.J.D. v. State, 842 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). Assuming that point was sufficiently preserved in the trial court, we disagree with the defendant’s characterization of the evidence presented. It consisted of a sufficient amount of direct evidence in addition to hearsay. The…
-
D.D. v. State, 271 So. 3d 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
-
Travion McKnight v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…92 (Fla. 2016) (observing: “A probation officer ‘testifying at hearing, subject to cross-examination, to what [he or] she personally did and observed . . . is classic non-hearsay testimony.’”) (internal citation omitted); A.J.D. v. State, 842 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (observing that hearsay is admissible in revocation proceedings, but hearsay cannot serve as the sole basis for revocation); Hall v. State, 744 So. 2d 517, 520-21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (reaffirming that “probation can be revoked on t…