JOHNNIE LEE RADER, 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.
The court held that the restitution order must be reversed and remanded for a new hearing due to insufficient evidence and because probation was not imposed.
Appellant appealed orders denying postconviction relief and a restitution order. The restitution order was entered without probation being imposed and…
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 Insufficient Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Johnnie Lee Rader appeals from the orders denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He also directly appeals from a restitution order. We affirm the orders denying Rader’s motion for postconviction relief without further discussion. We reverse the restitution order. The restitution order which is the subject of this appeal was entered in October 1999. It ordered restitution in the amount of $23,572.04. The State correctly concedes that the order must be reversed and remanded for a new hearing because insufficient evidence was presented to support the amount of restitution ordered. See Crowley v. State, 710 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); see also Smith v. State, 651 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Williams v. State, 645 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); T.W. v. State, 576 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).
Additionally, the restitution order was entered as a condition of probation, although probation was not imposed as any part of Rader’s sentence. Thus, on remand, the time and manner of payment of the restitution should be clarified. See § 775.089(3), Fla. Stat. (1989).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
STRINGER and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 645 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Smith v. State, 651 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Crowley v. State, 710 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- T.W. v. State, 576 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)