MITCHELL
v.
STATE
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.
A trial court must reduce to writing its oral pronouncement of probation violations and revocation, and failure to do so is reversible error requiring remand.
[1] A trial court's oral pronouncement of probation violations and revocation must be reduced to a written order stating the basis for revocation; failure to comply with this…
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 court must 'reduce to writing its oral pronouncement of the violations and revocation of . . . probation.'”
The court citing Brown v. State as establishing the long-standing requirement
Mitchell was placed on probation with specified conditions of supervision. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court orally pronounced that the St…
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 Written Order Of Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed January 17, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D17-307 Lower Tribunal No. 11-15037A
________________
Zevin Mitchell,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose Fernandez, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kayla H. McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and LAGOA, and SALTER, JJ.
LAGOA, J.
Zevin Mitchell (“Mitchell”) appeals the trial court’s revocation of his probation and sentence. We remand for the trial court to enter a written order of revocation of probation.
After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court orally pronounced that the State had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Mitchell violated his probation by committing offenses in violation of condition five of his conditions of supervision and sentenced Mitchell to twenty-five years in state prison.1 On appeal, Mitchell alleges, and the State properly concedes, that the trial court erred in failing to enter a written order of revocation of probation.
It is well-settled that a trial court must “reduce to writing its oral pronouncement of the violations and revocation of . . . probation.” Brown v. State,
127 So. 3d 831, 831 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); accord Centano v. State, 880 So. 2d
1277, 1278 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); McCloud v. State, 653 So. 2d 453, 455 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1995); see also, e.g., Joachin v. State, 199 So. 3d 439-40 (Fla. 3d DCA
2016); Hulse v. State, 170 So. 3d 911, 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015); Burt v. State, 931
So. 2d 1005, 1006 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Wilcox v. State, 919 So. 2d 609, 609 (Fla.
3d DCA 2006). Where a trial court fails to enter a written order of revocation of
probation, this Court has remanded the matter to the trial court with directions for it to enter a written order stating the basis for revocation. See Wilcox, 919 So. 2d at 609; McCloud, 653 So. 2d at 455. Cf. Allen v. State, 780 So. 2d 346, 346 (Fla.
3d DCA 2001) (remanding for correction of final order of revocation of probation and directing the trial court to enter written order that provided the basis for revocation and conformed to the trial court’s oral findings at the revocation hearing).
Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to enter a written order of revocation of probation.2 Mitchell need not be present for the entry of the written order. Jones v. State, 638 So. 2d 126, 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Mitchell v. State, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D2286 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
-
Adan Espinoza-Brito v. State, 246 So. 3d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
-
Raimondi v. State, 253 So. 3d 749 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (13 total)
- Jones v. State, 638 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
- McCLOUD v. State, 653 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Brown v. State, 127 So. 3d 831 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
- Mitchell v. State, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D2286 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
- Frederick v. McDONOUGH, 931 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Hulse v. State, 170 So. 3d 911 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
- Joachin v. State, 199 So. 3d 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
- Allen v. State, 780 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Miami Resorts, Inc. v. Delsa M. Calderon, 780 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Teofilo Bermudez Centano v. State, 880 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)