M. C. P., APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
M. C. P., APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
276 So. 2d 538
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1973)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
Affirmed. See: Shea v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 767; Bertone v. State, Fla.App.1969, 224 So.2d 400; Stunson v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 294; Zicca v. State, Fla.App.1970, 232 So.2d 414; State v. Ruggles, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 692; Waterhouse v. State, Fla.App.1972, 256 So.2d 397; State v. Gustafson, Fla.1972, 258 So.2d 1; United States v. Pennington, 5th Cir. 1971, 441 F.2d 249.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
King v. State, 349 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…icted and unim-peached testimony explains his conduct and leaves him blameless, particularly when similarly exonerated by the “victim” of the alleged offense, the trial court is not authorized to revoke or modify his probation. See Larocco v. State, 276 So. 2d 538 (Fla.4th DCA 1973). In view whereof, it may be assumed that the trial court looked more at appellant’s having driven, without a license in making its determination of guilt than to the evidence relating to a “stolen” car or “unlawful possession” th…
-
Franklin v. State, 345 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)…icted, and his testimony about disarming the assailant was actually confirmed by the State’s witnesses. Under these circumstances we find the proof presented at the hearing was not sufficient to sustain the revocation of probation. Larocco v. State, 276 So. 2d 538 (Fla.4th DCA 1973). Accordingly, the order of revocation of probation and the judgment and sentence are reversed with directions that the order of probation of November 3, 1971 be reinstated. DOWNEY, J., concurs. DAUKSCH, J., concurs specially, w…
-
Tedder v. State, 306 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 1974)…the United States Supreme Court, holds due process must be afforded a probationer in revocation proceedings. Here, there was no evidentiary showing of intentional violation by Tedder of the probation order. See also, Larocco v. State (Fla.App.1973), 276 So. 2d 538, and Hardison v. Texas (Tex.Cr.App.), 450 S.W. 2d 638 (1970). Manifest in the context of this cause is the presence of involuntary servitude. Tedder had been given his liberty under a probation order contingent upon his pecuniary ability to make in…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Gustafson, 258 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1972)
- Stunson v. State, 228 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- Shea v. State, 167 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Bertone v. State, 224 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- Copeland v. State, 232 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)
- United States v. Pennington, 441 F.2d 249 (5th Cir. 1971)
- Worthern v. State, 245 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- State v. Ruggles, 245 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Waterhouse v. State, 256 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)