MICHAEL JOE WYNPERLE, 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 while the probation revocation itself was valid based on the defendant's admission, a formal order specifying the violated conditions must be entered.
Wynperle's probation was revoked for committing a new law violation. The trial court entered judgments and sentences indicating probation violation, b…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an Anders1 appeal of the revocation of Wynperle’s probation in May 2008, for committing a new law violation. Independent review of the record reveals no issues of arguable merit, but we must remand for entry of a formal order of revocation of probation.
We previously relinquished jurisdiction for the trial court to enter an order of revocation. What we received were judgments and sentences dated December 17, 2008, for the original offenses. While these documents indicate that Wynperle is a probation violator and that he violated the conditions stated in the attached affidavits of violation of probation, those affidavits were not attached to the judgments and sentences, although they are in the original record. However, those affidavits were filed after the revocation of Wyn-perle’s probation that is at issue in this appeal, and they list conditions different from the one that Wynperle admitted to violating in this case.
A “trial court is required to enter a formal order of violation of probation that lists the specific conditions the court determined [the defendant] violated.” Cato v. State, 845 So.2d 250, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). The transcript of the violation of probation hearing reflects that Wynperle admitted to violating his probation by committing a new law violation and that the trial court revoked his probation based upon that admission. We remand with *173directions that the trial court enter a formal order of revocation of probation reflecting these facts. See Dolinger v. State, 779 So.2d 419, 421 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Affirmed but remanded with directions.
WHATLEY, KELLY, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Underwood v. State, 98 So. 3d 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…ird issue, Mr. Underwood argues, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred by failing to enter a written revocation of probation order that specifies the specific conditions of supervision that Mr. Underwood violated. See Wynperle v. State, 21 So. 3d 172, 172-73 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Reyes v. State, 9 So. 3d 649, 650 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Cato v. State, 845 So. 2d 250, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). We are compelled to remand with directions to the trial court to enter a formal probation revocation order that…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Adams v. State, 779 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Harris v. State, 845 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Ponce Cato v. State, 845 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)