B. A. D. v. State
379 So. 2d 1311, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 15954
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 13, 1980·No. Nos. PP-214, PP-215·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The restitution order attending this probation for the two minor appellants is not erroneous for requiring each to repay $172.00, one-third of the aggregate thefts by appellants and another using the same credit card. Assuming that, an evidentiary hearing is not required on the amount of each child’s separate charges on the card. The words “or such other amount deemed due by the probation counselor” are stricken from the order, which is otherwise
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
B. A. D. v. State, 379 So. 2d 1311, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 15954 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).
379 So. 2d 1311 (B. A. D. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Pollreisz v. State
406 So. 2d 1297 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)