Bain v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bain v. State

595 So. 2d 590, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3537, 1992 WL 63103

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bain v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 642 So. 2d 578 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 1, 1992·No. No. 91-2110·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the revocation of appellant’s probation based upon grounds one and two, i.e., moving from his approved residence without first procuring the consent of his probation officer and trespassing upon the grounds or facilities of a public school in violation of section 228.091, Florida Statutes (1989). However, we hold that ground number three, unlawful loitering or prowling in violation of section 856.021, Florida Statutes (1989), was not adequately proven.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the revocation of appellant’s probation based upon grounds one and two, i.e., moving from his approved residence without first procuring the consent of his probation officer and trespassing upon the grounds or facilities of a public school in violation of section 228.091, Florida Statutes (1989). However, we hold that ground number three, unlawful loitering or prowling in violation of section 856.021, Florida Statutes (1989), was not adequately proven.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., concur.

Bain v. State, 595 So. 2d 590, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3537, 1992 WL 63103 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

595 So. 2d 590 (Bain v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.