WAYNE NADEAU, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the order of revocation of appellant’s probation. The trial court found a violation of probation based upon testimony that appellant committed a battery. However, the evidence presented by the state was entirely hearsay. “Hearsay, though admissible in a probation revocation hearing, is insufficient standing alone to establish a violation of a condition of probation.” Wilcox v. State, 770 So. 2d 733, 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see also Santiago v. State, 889 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (observation of bruise on victim plus hearsay account of incident was insufficient to prove violation of probation based upon battery). We reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate appellant’s probation.
WARNER, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jerri Wright v. State, 958 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…hat someone had made purchases at a time when appellant was supposed to be at home. “Hearsay, though admissible in a probation revocation hearing, is insufficient standing alone to establish a violation of a condition of probation.” Nadeau v. State, 920 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (quoting Wilcox v. State, 770 So. 2d 733, 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)). The evidence presented by the state was insufficient to support violations in allegations II and III. With respect to allegation IV for failure to pay her costs…
-
Prop. Solutions Powerhouse, LLC v. Nelson (Fla. 2d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Santiago v. State, 889 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- M.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 770 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)