FABIAN MONCRIEFFE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2009-09-02
No. 4D07-4717
STEVENSON, MAY and LEVINE, JJ„ concur.
17 So. 3d 850 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2009) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for a violation of probation based on his arrest on new charges. He argues the court erred in finding that he violated his probation and in failing to enter a written order of revocation. We find no error in the court’s finding that the defendant violated his probation, but we do find error in the trial court’s failure “to enter a written order specifying the specific condition of probation that [the defendant] violated....” Peterson v. State, 962 So.2d 367, 369 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). We therefore reverse and remand the case to the trial court for entry of a written order of revocation.

Reversed in parí and remanded.

STEVENSON, MAY and LEVINE, JJ„ concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Davis v. State, 33 So. 3d 747 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
    …v. State, 17 So. 3d 886, 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Foggy v. State, 837 So. 2d 570, 571 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). We remind the trial court that a written order of revocation, specifying the conditions violated, is required. See, e.g., Moncrieffe v. State, 17 So. 3d 850, 851 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Reversed and Remanded. WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur. . In his pro se brief, Davis seeks to avoid a revocation of probation based upon his curfew violation by arguing that the curfew condition is itself illegal. The lega…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw