Amaya v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Amaya v. State

75 So. 3d 417, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19382, 2011 WL 6057909

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 7, 2011·No. 3D10-573·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the defendant’s probation, as the record contains sufficient evidence from which the trial court could have found any of the alleged violations of probation occurred, under the preponderance of the evidence standard. Further, the trial court did not prejudice the defendant’s due process rights in its conduct of the hearing. See Shores v. State, 765 So.2d 166, 167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); McPherson v. State, 530 So.2d 1095, 1099 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Wilson v. State, 506 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the defendant’s probation, as the record contains sufficient evidence from which the trial court could have found any of the alleged violations of probation occurred, under the preponderance of the evidence standard. Further, the trial court did not prejudice the defendant’s due process rights in its conduct of the hearing. See Shores v. State, 765 So.2d 166, 167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); McPherson v. State, 530 So.2d 1095, 1099 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Wilson v. State, 506 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Affirmed.

Amaya v. State, 75 So. 3d 417, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19382, 2011 WL 6057909 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

75 So. 3d 417 (Amaya v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related