TERRANCE ROGERS
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 make a specific finding that a probation violation is willful and substantial before revoking probation, and appellate courts cannot infer willfulness from a mere finding of violation.
[1] A trial court must make a specific written or oral finding that a probation violation is willful and substantial before revoking probation; such a finding is constitution…
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“The absence of a specific finding of willfulness in a probation revocation proceeding cannot be considered harmless error. An automatic revocation of probation without such a finding would be unconstitutional.”
Del Valle v. State, cited by the court regarding constitutional requirements
Terrance Rogers was on probation and committed a technical violation. The trial court revoked his probation based on this violation.…
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 Willful And Substantial Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed April 7, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D20-1083 Lower Tribunal No. F19-15141
________________
Terrance Rogers,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lourdes Simon, Judge. Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kseniya Smychkouskaya, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Terrance Rogers, challenges an order revoking his
probation.1 Because the record is devoid of any finding as to whether the
technical violation precipitating the revocation was willful and substantial,
and this court is precluded from inferring “willfulness from the trial court’s
determination that [a]ppellant violated his probation,” we reverse and
remand for the lower tribunal to make such a finding.2 Giambrone v. State,
109 So. 3d 1279, 1280 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (citation omitted); see Del Valle
v. State, 80 So. 3d 999, 1011 (Fla. 2011) (“The absence of a specific finding
of willfulness in a probation revocation proceeding cannot be considered
harmless error. An automatic revocation of probation without such a finding
would be unconstitutional.”); see also State v. Meeks, 789 So. 2d 982, 987
(Fla. 2001); Duquesne v. State, 242 So. 3d 1183, 1185 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018);
Thompson v. State, 172 So. 3d 527, 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- del Valle v. State, 80 So. 3d 999 (Fla. 2011)
- State v. Meeks, 789 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 2001)
- Thompson v. State, 172 So. 3d 527 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
- Giambrone v. State, 109 So. 3d 1279 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Duquesne v. State, 242 So. 3d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)