ROGER LEE OOTEN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2021-10-22
No. 21-0741
White, J., Lambert, C.J., Edwards, J., Wozniak, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2021)

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.


Holding

A probation revocation order must specify the particular conditions of probation that the defendant violated.


Headnotes

[1] A probation revocation order must specify the particular conditions of probation that the defendant violated.

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

Key Quotes

“because the order revoking probation does not list the specific conditions of probation that Appellant was found to have violated, we remand to the trial court for entry of an amended order to include the conditions that it found were violated”

Court's explanation for remand

Facts & Procedural History

Ooten was convicted and sentenced, and subsequently violated the conditions of his probation. The trial court revoked his probation and imposed a sent…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Lambert

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

ROGER LEE OOTEN,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D21-741 LT Case No. 2016-CF-000715-A-0

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed October 22, 2021

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Keith F. White, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and George D.E. Burden, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Bonnie Jean Parrish, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

2

In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm, without further elaboration, the judgment and sentence imposed by the trial court following Appellant’s violation of probation trial. However, because the order revoking probation does not list the specific conditions of probation that Appellant was found to have violated, we remand to the trial court for entry of an amended order to include the conditions that it found were violated. See Ford v. State, 293 So. 3d 553, 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (affirming the judgment and sentence imposed but remanding to the trial court for the entry of an amended order specifying the conditions of probation violated by the defendant).

On remand, the amended order should also reflect the citation to the predecessor statute, section 794.041(2)(b), Florida Statutes, regarding Appellant’s underlying criminal conviction.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions for entry of amended revocation order consistent with this opinion.

LAMBERT, C.J., EDWARDS and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw