ADAM BERCHIN, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Berchin seeks certiorari to overturn a trial court's denial of his motion to modify a probation condition requiring residence at a specific assisted living facility. The appellate court holds that a trial court has authority to modify probation conditions without a violation warrant, provided the modification does not enhance the conditions, and remands for consideration on the merits.
A trial court has authority to modify or rescind the terms and conditions of probation it imposed at any time under Florida Statute § 948.03(2). A modification is permissible absent a violation if it does not enhance probation; changing the required residence from one assisted living facility to another of equal or lesser restrictiveness is not an enhancement and may be considered on the merits.
[1] A trial court has the authority to modify or rescind the terms or conditions of probation at any time.
[2] A trial court may not change an order of probation by enhancing the terms thereof absent proof of a violation.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A trial court has authority to modify or rescind the terms or conditions of probation imposed by it at any time. § 948.03(2), Fla. Stat. (2006).”
Establishes the core holding that trial courts possess inherent authority to modify probation conditions without requiring a violation warrant.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBerchin was convicted of battery of a person over 65 and sentenced to two years of probation with a special condition requiring residence at Avondale …
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 Probationary Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Adam Berchin petitions this court for a writ of certiorari to quash the trial court order denying his rule 3.800(c) motion to modify a special condition of probation.
Petitioner was convicted of battery of a person over the age of sixty-five, and was sentenced to a two year probationary sentence. As a special condition of his probation petitioner was to reside at Avondale Manor, an assisted living facility. Forty-two days after sentence was imposed petitioner filed an emergency motion to modify his sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c). Petitioner re quested the trial court allow him to reside at Abbey Manor, another assisted living facility, as he feared for his safety at Avon-dale Manor. The circuit court in this case ruled that the motion was “improper,” stating probation can only be modified when a warrant alleging a violation of probation is filed. However, the circuit court did have the authority and discretion to rule upon the merits of petitioner’s motion. See State v. Watson, 909 So. 2d 942, 945 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (stating that probation is a matter of grace and if a trial judge chooses, it can exercise discretion to extend or modify probation following a violation) (citations omitted); State v. M.R.T., 848 So. 2d 467, 467 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (finding that a trial court has discretion to exercise jurisdiction and terminate probation at any time pursuant to section 948.05, Florida Statutes).
A trial court has authority to modify or rescind the terms or conditions of probation imposed by it at any time. § 948.03(2), Fla. Stat. (2006). In Clark v. State, 579 So. 2d 109, 111 (Fla.1991), the Florida Supreme Court held that “[ajbsent proof of a violation, the court cannot change an order of probation or community control by enhancing the terms thereof, even if the defendant has agreed in writing with his probation officer to allow such a modification and has waived notice and hearing.” To determine whether a modification is an enhancement of probation, one must look to see whether the condition as changed is more restrictive than the original condition. Gerber v. State, 856 So. 2d 1113, 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
Petitioner is attempting to modify the special condition of his probation that mandates he live at the Avondale Manor assisted living facility. Changing the probationary term to allow petitioner to live instead at the Abbey Manor assisted living facility is not an enhancement of the probationary term, as there is no indication that the new assisted living facility is more restrictive than the current assisted living facility.
Therefore the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in determining that it could not consider modifying the petitioner’s special condition of probation without the state filing a warrant of violation of probation. Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari and remand to the circuit court to consider the motion on its merits and to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine if there is a basis for petitioner’s fears of physical abuse at the assisted living facility.
FARMER, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Travessa Eugene Merricks v. State, 90 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…cation of the sentencing judge’s probation and community control orders did not constitute an enhancement of his sentence without a violation, under the facts of this case. Compare Lippman v. State, 633 So. 2d 1061 (Fla.1994), with Berchin v. State, 938 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). The trial court added electronic monitoring with an ankle bracelet during the period of time when Merricks would reside at home, until he could be admitted into a suitable group home of the sort which had been ordered by the ori…
Authorities Cited
- Clark v. State, 579 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 1991)
- Gerber v. State, 856 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Schaffer v. State, 909 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- State v. M.R.T., 848 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)