ROBERT MARION BAKER, APPELLANT (DEFENDANT),
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE (STATE)
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.
The court held that the trial court did not err in revoking probation without further inquiry into the factual basis of the plea.
[1] A trial court may revoke probation forthwith upon a probationer's admission to the charge of violation, after being advised of the charge.
[2] A probation revocation hearing need not meet the strict requirements of a criminal trial.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBaker pled guilty to violating probation after being charged with larceny and firearm possession. During the revocation hearing, Baker stated he was i…
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 Knowing And Voluntary Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
As a result of a plea agreement, Baker pled guilty to a charge of possession of dangerous drugs; he was adjudged guilty; and he was placed on probation for five years. Thereafter, Baker was charged with larceny of a firearm and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Then he was charged with violation of probation. As a result of a plea agreement, Baker pled guilty to the charge of violation of probation, and the State dismissed the charges of larceny of a firearm and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Thereupon, the trial court revoked his probation and sentenced him to three and one-half years in prison.
The trial court established that Baker’s plea of guilty was made knowingly and voluntarily. In addition, the trial court determined that Baker admitted violating his probation, and that there was a factual basis for the plea. However, after doing this, and at the conclusion of the revocation hearing, the trial court asked Baker why he took the firearm. Baker responded that he did not mean to; that he was intoxicated at the time. Now, Baker urges that the trial court erred in failing to make further inquiry into the factual basis for the plea, as Baker’s response indicated a possible defense to the charge of larceny which Baker should have knowingly and intelligently waived. The trial court did not err. Probation is a matter of grace, not right. Section 948.06(1), Florida Statutes, provides that the trial court shall advise a probationer of the charge of violation, and if the charge is admitted to be true may forthwith revoke probation. A revocation hearing need not meet the strict requirements of a criminal trial. Baker was advised of the charge of violation, and after counselling with his attorney admitted the charge was true. This was sufficient.
In addition, Baker received a favorable plea agreement which resulted in the dismissal of the charges of larceny and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
Affirmed.
BOYER, C. J., and McCORD, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watkins v. State, 368 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…rt for sanction of valid supervisory directions. We also point out that the condition in question is specifically authorized by Section 948.03(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1977). Probation is dependent on legislative and judicial grace. Baker v. State, 319 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). The burdens of compliance with conditions are slight in comparison to the alternative imprisonment. The trial court is directed to strike the finding that appellant violated his probation by failing to pay the supervisory fee.…
-
Johnson v. State, 776 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…rial court erred by failing to conduct a plea colloquy before accepting Appellant’s admission to violations of probation/community control. A probation revocation hearing need not meet the strict requirements of a criminal trial. See Baker v. State, 319 So. 2d 628, 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Allen v. State, 662 So. 2d 380, 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Upon a guilty plea to a probation violation, there is no requirement that a determination be made as to the factual basis of the plea or that the plea was freely and…
-
Douglas v. State, 433 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…of the plea. Suggs v. State, 304 So. 2d 463, 464 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). While minimal due [*14] process standards must be met in probation revocation proceedings, it is not necessary to meet the strict requirements of a criminal trial. Baker v. State, 319 So. 2d 628, 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). AFFIRMED. THOMPSON, J., concurs. MILLS, J., concurs specially with an opinion.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence