DEON MARKEY GLISPY
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.
Community control revocation is affirmed where substantial evidence supports multiple drug-related violations, but a home confinement violation must be struck where the State presented no competent evidence of unauthorized absence.
[1] A violation of home confinement as a community control condition requires competent, substantial evidence that the defendant's absence from home was not authorized by exc…
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 intelligenceGlispy was placed on community control for cocaine-related convictions and was arrested sixteen days later for selling cocaine and other offenses. The…
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 Community Control Conditions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Deon Markey Glispy appeals the judgment and sentence imposed following the violation and revocation of his community control. We review the trial court’s finding of a violation of community control for competent, substantial evidence. See Kegler v. State, 313 So. 3d 824, 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). Glispy had been placed on community control in connection with two criminal convictions, including the sale of cocaine. Sixteen days later, he was arrested for—among other things—selling cocaine. Competent, substantial evidence supported the trial court’s findings on these multiple new law violations.
The trial court erred, however, when it concluded that Glispy had violated community control by failing to remain confined in his home. This condition had exceptions for work-related travel, public service work, or special activities. The State did not elicit any competent, substantial evidence to support this violation. The community control officer did not testify; the State presented no evidence that Glispy’s absence from home had not been approved.
Because it is clear the trial court was focused on Glispy’s drug-related violations and not his failure to remain at home, a remand for resentencing is unnecessary. See Payet v. State, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D1705, D1705 (Fla. 5th DCA Aug. 12, 2022). We therefore affirm the trial court’s revocation of Glispy’s community control but remand for it to strike its finding that Glispy violated condition sixteen of his community control. AFFIRMED and REMANDED. EVANDER, EISNAUGLE and TRAVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Glispy v. State, 313 So. 3d 824 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)…key Glispy appeals the judgment and sentence imposed following the violation and revocation of his community control. We review the trial court’s finding of a violation of community control for competent, substantial evidence. See Kegler v. State, 313 So. 3d 824, 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). Glispy had been placed on community control in connection with two criminal convictions, including the sale of cocaine. Sixteen days later, he was arrested for—among other things—selling cocaine. Competent, substantial ev…
-
Glispy v. State, 313 So. 3d 824 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)…key Glispy appeals the judgment and sentence imposed following the violation and revocation of his community control. We review the trial court’s finding of a violation of community control for competent, substantial evidence. See Kegler v. State, 313 So. 3d 824, 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). Glispy had been placed on community control in connection with two criminal convictions, including the sale of cocaine. Sixteen days later, he was arrested for—among other things—selling cocaine. Competent, substantial ev…
-
Safir S. Kazi v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Glispy v. State, 313 So. 3d 824 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)
- Glispy v. State, 313 So. 3d 824 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)