WILLIAMS
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.
Damascus Isaiah Williams appealed a probation revocation and 25-year sentence imposed after he violated conditions of his probation. The appellate court affirmed the revocation based on two violations but found insufficient evidence for a third violation regarding failure to pay supervision costs.
The court affirmed the probation revocation and sentences but found insufficient evidence that Williams had the ability to pay supervision costs but purposely failed to do so. The revocation order was remanded for correction to delete the finding based on the failure-to-pay violation.
[1] A violation of probation based on failure to pay supervision costs requires sufficient evidence demonstrating that the probationer had the ability to pay but purposely di…
[2] Harmless error doctrine applies to a probation revocation where the trial court found multiple violations but improperly relied on one unsupported violation ground, if th…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliams pleaded nolo contendere to armed robbery in November 2013 and received concurrent 5-year sentences followed by 10 years probation. In May 202…
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 Violation Of Probation (Vop) cases and more on FLexlaw
December 18, 2024 RAY, J.
In November 2013, Damascus Isaiah Williams pleaded nolo contendere to one count of armed robbery in four cases. He was sentenced in each case to a downward departure sentence of 5 years in prison followed by 10 years on probation, with these sentences to run concurrently.
In May 2023, an amended violation of probation (VOP) affidavit was filed alleging that he violated his probation by (1) committing the new offense of possession of a controlled substance (hydrocodone), (2) committing the new offense of possession of a controlled substance (cocaine), (3) committing the new offense of possession of drug paraphernalia, (4) failing to pay the cost of supervision, and (5) associating with a person engaged in criminal activity. After an evidentiary hearing, the circuit court determined that he had committed the violations alleged in grounds (1), (3), and (4). The court revoked his probation and sentenced him to concurrent terms of 25 years in prison in each case.
On appeal, Williams argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove the three violations found by the circuit court. We affirm without discussion the court’s finding that Williams violated his probation by committing the new offenses of possession of hydrocodone and possession of drug paraphernalia. But regarding Williams’ failure to pay the cost of supervision, there was insufficient evidence to show that Williams had the ability to pay but purposely did not do so. See Giambrone v. State, 109 So. 3d 1279, 1280–81 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). Even so, it is clear from the record that absent the improper ground, the court would still have revoked his probation and imposed the same sentences. See Edwards v. State, 243 So. 3d 520, 521 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). Therefore, we affirm the revocation order and resulting sentences but remand for the correction of the order to delete the finding of a violation based on ground (4) of the amended VOP affidavit.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions. B.L. THOMAS and NORDBY, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ Jason Cromey of Cromey Law, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Christina Piotrowski, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.