DOMINIQUE SHANTEL HOPPS, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed convictions for drug delivery and possession but reversed the special probation condition prohibiting early termination, holding that trial courts lack authority to divest the Department of Corrections of its statutory power to recommend early termination of probation.
A trial court lacks authority to impose a special condition of probation that divests the Department of Corrections of its power to recommend early termination of probation.
[1] A trial court lacks statutory authority to impose a special condition of probation that divests the Department of Corrections of its power to recommend early termination…
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“[A] trial judge is not authorized to divest the Department of Corrections of its authority to recommend early termination of probation.”
Court citing Baker v. State to establish the rule that trial judges cannot restrict DOC's early termination authority.
Dominique Shantel Hopps was convicted by jury of delivery of cannabis and possession of cannabis (less than twenty grams). She was sentenced to time s…
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 Early Termination Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
Dominique Shantel Hopps appeals her judgments and sentences imposed for one count of delivery of cannabis and one count of possession of cannabis (less than twenty grams) following a jury trial. Ms. Hopps was sentenced to time served on the possession charge and three years’ prison followed by two years’ drug offender probation on the delivery charge, with a special condition of probation calling for no early termination of probation. We affirm the judgments and sentences without discussion except as to the condition of no early termination of probation.
The trial court erred by imposing “a special condition of probation that purports to divest the Department of Corrections (DOC) of its authority to recommend early termination.” Murphy v. State, 976 So.2d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); see also Baker v. State, 619 So.2d 411, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (“[A] trial judge is not authorized to divest the Department of Corrections of its authority to recommend early termination of probation.”). Ms. Hopps raised this issue in a motion to correct sentencing error, which was timely filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). The State properly concedes error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to strike this special condition of probation and to correct the sentence and probation order so that the DOC is aware that the special condition no longer exists. We affirm in all other respects.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded for correction of sentence and probation order.
KELLY and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Henderson v. Henderson, 619 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Emmett William Baker v. State, 619 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Murphy v. State, 976 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)