KEION WARE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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's decision to revoke probation is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and hearsay evidence corroborated by direct evidence, as well as false exculpatory statements made to police, can sustain a probation violation.
[1] Hearsay evidence is admissible in probation violation hearings and can sustain a violation when corroborated by direct evidence.
[2] A defendant's false exculpatory statements made to police constitute substantive evidence of consciousness of guilt in probation violation proceedings.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 defendant's false exculpatory statements made to the police to avoid prosecution for a crime constitute 'substantive evidence tending to affirmatively show a consciousness of guilt on [the defendant's] part for committing that crime.'”
Garcia v. State, cited for the proposition that false statements to police demonstrate consciousness of guilt in probation violation proceedings
Keion Ware appealed a probation revocation decision from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County. The trial court found evidence of probation violatio…
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 Violation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed November 5, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-2001 Lower Tribunal No. F20-11402 ________________
Keion Ware, Appellant,
vs.
State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lody Jean, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender and Shannon Hemmendinger, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Liz Feliz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before SCALES, C.J., and LOGUE, and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM
2
Affirmed. See Facen v. State, 386 So. 3d 991, 993 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (an appellate court reviews the trial court’s decision to revoke probation for an abuse of discretion); Robertson v. State, 800 So. 2d 338, 339 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“Hearsay evidence is admissible in violation of probation hearings and can sustain a violation when corroborated by direct evidence.”); Garcia v. State, 373 So. 3d 1213, 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Certainly, a defendant’s false exculpatory statements made to the police to avoid prosecution for a crime constitute ‘substantive evidence tending to affirmatively show a consciousness of guilt on [the defendant’s] part for committing that crime.’”) (quoting Simpson v. State, 562 So. 2d 742, 745 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)); Johnson v. State, 378 So. 2d 108, 109 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (rejecting the contention that “an admission against interest is hearsay which, standing alone, cannot suffice as proof of violation of a condition of probation” because “a defendant’s admission, as opposed to statements by third parties, is [n]ot hearsay”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. State, 378 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Simpson v. State, 562 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Robertson v. State, 800 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Torres v. State, 386 So. 3d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)