JOSE ALEXIS TORRES
v.
THE 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 probation revocation decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion, provided the record contains competent substantial evidence of willful and substantial violations.
[1] In reviewing a probation revocation, the appellate court first examines whether competent substantial evidence supports the trial court's finding of willful and substanti…
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“In reviewing a probation revocation, we first assess whether the finding by the trial court of a 'willful and substantial violation is supported by competent substantial evidence.' If our examination yields competent, substantial evidence, 'the standard of review for the trial court's decision to revoke probation is abuse of discretion.'”
The court's articulation of the governing legal standard for reviewing probation revocation decisions.
Torres was a probationer in Miami-Dade County who was accused of violating the terms of his probation. The trial court revoked his probation based on …
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 February 26, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1474 Lower Tribunal Nos. F13-29484 & F13-29485
________________
Jose Alexis Torres,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Richard Hersch, Judge. Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before EMAS, SCALES, and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Robinson v. State, 907 So. 2d 1284, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (“The proper standard for finding a new law violation is whether a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the probationer committed the charged offense or offenses.”); Facen v. State, 386 So. 3d 991, 993 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“In reviewing a probation revocation, we first assess whether the finding by the trial court of a ‘willful and substantial violation is supported by competent substantial evidence.’ If our examination yields competent, substantial evidence, ‘the standard of review for the trial court’s decision to revoke probation is abuse of discretion.’” (quoting Savage v. State, 120 So. 3d 619, 621 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013))).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Torres v. State, 386 So. 3d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)…binson v. State, 907 So. 2d 1284, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (“The proper standard for finding a new law violation is whether a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the probationer committed the charged offense or offenses.”); Facen v. State, 386 So. 3d 991, 993 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“In reviewing a probation revocation, we first assess whether the finding by the trial court of a ‘willful and substantial violation is supported by competent substantial evidence.’ If our examination yields competent, subst…
-
Keion Ware v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Savage v. State, 120 So. 3d 619 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
- Robinson v. State, 907 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Torres v. State, 386 So. 3d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)