Baker v. State
426 So. 2d 1283, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20698
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Baker v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 425 So. 2d 36 →
Opinion
Appellant was charged with three violations of probation, two substantive, and one technical. The State concedes that the trial court erred with respect to the two substantive violations. We hold that the trial court also erred in finding appellant guilty of violating his probation based on the technical charge of nonpayment of the monthly probation fee. There was no showing of ability to pay and no finding of fact on the issue. See Smith v. State, 380 So.2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), and cases cited therein.
REVERSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Baker v. State, 426 So. 2d 1283, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20698 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).
426 So. 2d 1283 (Baker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Smith v. State
380 So. 2d 1175 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)