C.A.G. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

C.A.G. v. State

125 So. 3d 1004, 2013 WL 3240122, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10261

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 28, 2013·No. No. 2D12-1281·Published

Opinion

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

C.A.G. challenges the juvenile court’s finding that he violated a Tampa city ordinance prohibiting assemblies obstructing streets and sidewalks. We find no error in that decision and affirm without further comment. But we reverse the court’s order of probation because it does not state the term of the probation imposed. We remand with directions to enter a corrected probationary order. See J.M.W. v. State, 935 So.2d 630, 632 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

SILBERMAN, C.J., and LaROSE, J., Concur.

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

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

C.A.G. challenges the juvenile court’s finding that he violated a Tampa city ordinance prohibiting assemblies obstructing streets and sidewalks. We find no error in that decision and affirm without further comment. But we reverse the court’s order of probation because it does not state the term of the probation imposed. We remand with directions to enter a corrected probationary order. See J.M.W. v. State, 935 So.2d 630, 632 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

SILBERMAN, C.J., and LaROSE, J., Concur.

C.A.G. v. State, 125 So. 3d 1004, 2013 WL 3240122, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10261 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

125 So. 3d 1004 (C.A.G. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related