TONY JOHN LAGANO
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.
In an Anders appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's revocation of Lagano's drug offender probation and resulting sentences, but remanded with directions to amend the revocation order to exclude Special Condition 39, which the State did not pursue and the defendant did not admit violating.
The trial court properly revoked drug offender probation and imposed resulting sentences. However, the revocation order must be amended to remove Special Condition 39 as it was not properly before the court for adjudication.
[1] When a trial court revokes probation based on alleged violations, the revocation order must be amended to exclude any condition the defendant did not admit to violating a…
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“we affirm the trial court's order revoking Appellant's drug offender probation and the resulting judgment and sentences imposed”
The court's affirmation of the core revocation decision on the merits
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was subject to drug offender probation with various conditions, including Special Condition 39. At the violation of probation hearing, the S…
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 Probation Violation Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm the trial court’s order revoking Appellant’s drug offender probation and the resulting judgment and sentences imposed. However, because the order
inadvertently included a violation of Special Condition 39, which Appellant did not admit to violating and the State announced at the violation of probation hearing that it was not pursuing, we remand with directions to the trial court to enter an amended order of revocation of drug offender probation that does not include Special Condition 39 as one of the violated conditions of probation.
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.
WALLIS, LAMBERT, and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.