Cohen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cohen v. State

365 So. 2d 1052, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16905

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 27, 1978

DocketNo. 77-1963

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 365 So. 2d 1052 (Cohen v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cohen v. State, 365 So. 2d 1052, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16905 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

BERANEK, Judge.

Defendant had previously been adjudicated guilty of delivery of a controlled substance and was placed on probation for a term of three years. Defendant was subsequently charged with violating his probation and after hearing was found to be in violation of his probation. This appeal contests the violation holding. The violation of probation was based on findings that defendant was guilty of delivery of heroin and on the further ground that defendant was in violation of § 945.30 Fla.Stat. for failure to pay the costs of his supervision.

We find no error and affirm the conviction based upon the charge of delivery of heroin. We must, however, reverse the finding in regard to the cost of supervision. There was no evidence or finding regarding the defendant’s ability to make the payment on which he allegedly defaulted. Robbins v. State, 318 So.2d 472 (Fla.4th DCA 1975). Further, this finding was based solely upon hearsay evidence. Sharp [1053]*1053v. State, 303 So.2d 56 (4th DCA 1974); White v. State, 301 So.2d 464 (Fla.1st DCA 1974). For both of these reasons, the violation regarding defendant’s failure to pay cost of supervision was improper and is hereby reversed.

The conviction is affirmed based upon the criminal violation of delivery of heroin. The finding regarding cost of supervision is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing in light of this reversal.

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. REVERSED WITH DIRECTIONS.

DAUKSCH and MOORE, JJ., concur.

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

BERANEK, Judge.

Defendant had previously been adjudicated guilty of delivery of a controlled substance and was placed on probation for a term of three years. Defendant was subsequently charged with violating his probation and after hearing was found to be in violation of his probation. This appeal contests the violation holding. The violation of probation was based on findings that defendant was guilty of delivery of heroin and on the further ground that defendant was in violation of § 945.30 Fla.Stat. for failure to pay the costs of his supervision.

We find no error and affirm the conviction based upon the charge of delivery of heroin. We must, however, reverse the finding in regard to the cost of supervision. There was no evidence or finding regarding the defendant’s ability to make the payment on which he allegedly defaulted. Robbins v. State, 318 So.2d 472 (Fla.4th DCA 1975). Further, this finding was based solely upon hearsay evidence. Sharp [1053]*1053v. State, 303 So.2d 56 (4th DCA 1974); White v. State, 301 So.2d 464 (Fla.1st DCA 1974). For both of these reasons, the violation regarding defendant’s failure to pay cost of supervision was improper and is hereby reversed.

The conviction is affirmed based upon the criminal violation of delivery of heroin. The finding regarding cost of supervision is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing in light of this reversal.

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. REVERSED WITH DIRECTIONS.

DAUKSCH and MOORE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

365 So. 2d 1052, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-state-fladistctapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack