JONATHAN CALDWELL, SR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2005-11-30
No. 2D04-4771
Davis, J., Silberman, J., LaRose, J.
914 So. 2d 1069 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2005)

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.

Synopsis

Appellate court affirmed denial of postconviction relief on first issue but agreed with State's concession that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to probation conditions inapplicable to the defendant's crime, requiring their removal.


Holding

Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to probation conditions 22, 23, and 24 that applied only to offenses involving victims under eighteen, which were invalid because the victim was not a minor.


Headnotes

[1] Probation conditions applicable only to offenses with victims under eighteen years old are invalid when imposed on a defendant whose victim was an adult, as they are not…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Caldwell pleaded guilty to committing a lewd and lascivious act on an elderly person under section 825.1025, Florida Statutes. The trial court imposed…

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.


Opinion of the Court
DAVIS, Judge.

DAVIS, Judge.

Jonathan Caldwell, Sr., challenges the postconviction court’s denial, following an evidentiary hearing, of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We find no merit in the first issue he raises on appeal and decline to comment. However, the State concedes error as to the second issue, in which Caldwell argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to certain probation conditions that the court imposed.

Caldwell entered a negotiated guilty plea to the offense of committing a lewd and lascivious act on an elderly person pursuant to section 825.1025, Florida Statutes (2004). However, the court imposed probation conditions 22, 23, and 24, which all specifically apply only when the victim of the offense is under the age of eighteen. Because the victim here was not under the age of eighteen, these probation conditions are not “reasonably related to the offense, to the rehabilitation of the defendant or to the protection of the public.” Cassamassima v. State, 657 So. 2d 906, 909 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (en banc). Accordingly, they are invalid and must be stricken. We therefore remand with directions to the trial court to strike conditions 22, 23, and 24.

Affirmed; remanded with directions.

SILBERMAN and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw