HELENA RENA BILLINGSLY
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 revocation of probation based on a defendant's admission to violations is valid, but the written order must specifically identify the conditions of probation that were violated.
[1] A written order revoking probation must specifically identify the 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Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBillingsly's probation was revoked after she admitted to several charged violations. The trial court accepted her admission, revoked probation, impose…
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
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 5D2025-1204 LT Case No. 2023-MM-001479-A
HELENA RENA BILLINGSLY, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
On appeal from the County Court for Sumter County. Paul L. Militello, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Evan Altes, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Zachery L. Wiseman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
August 14, 2026
PER CURIAM.
Appellant's probation was revoked based upon her admitting to several charged violations. The trial court accepted her admission, revoked her probation, imposed a legal sentence, and ordered her to pay certain outstanding fines and court costs. There
was no error in any aspect of that; therefore, we affirm. 1 However, the written order revoking probation failed to identify the conditions of probation that she admitted to violating and failed to identify the conditions of probation that Appellant was found to have violated. Accordingly, we remand to the lower tribunal for entry of an amended written order of revocation which sets forth the conditions of probation that Appellant violated. See Hurta v. State, 403 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025) (citing Bride v. State, 391 So. 3d 515 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED.
MAKAR, EDWARDS, and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1987)
- Hurta v. State, 391 So. 3d 515 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025)