Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Cunningham v. State

Cunningham v. State

575 So. 2d 1375, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2211, 1991 WL 35027
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 13, 1991
DocketNo. 90-01752
StatusPublished

This text of 575 So. 2d 1375 (Cunningham 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
Cunningham v. State, 575 So. 2d 1375, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2211, 1991 WL 35027 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

FRANK, Judge.

We affirm the appellant’s judgment and sentence imposed following violation of probation. We note, however, that the court made no finding that the appellant was able to pay the costs of supervision, one of the grounds upon which his probation was violated.

We therefore strike from the order of revocation any reference to condition number 2. See Rainey v. State, 528 So.2d 528 [1376]*1376(Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Reynolds v. State, 498 So.2d 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

SCHOONOVER, C.J., and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Reynolds v. State
498 So. 2d 607 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Rainey v. State
528 So. 2d 528 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
575 So. 2d 1375, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2211, 1991 WL 35027, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cunningham-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.