Deason v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Deason v. State

404 So. 2d 1140, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21429

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 21, 1981

DocketNo. 80-1677

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 404 So. 2d 1140 (Deason 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

Deason v. State, 404 So. 2d 1140, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21429 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged with violation of several conditions of his probation, one of which required that he pay $10.00 per month toward the cost of his supervision. Appellant did not pay the required fee for [1141]*1141his supervision and the court found him guilty of violation of several conditions of probation including the one requiring payment of the supervision fee. However, no evidence was adduced to show appellant had the ability to make said payments. Absent such proof the court if not authorized to find a violation of said condition. Robbins v. State, 318 So.2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). This does not require a reversal of the order of revocaiton because there is adequate proof of violation of the other conditions.

Accordingly, the order of revocation is remanded to the trial court with directions to delete the finding of a violation of condition (5) of the order of probation in failing to comply with Section 945.30, Florida Statutes, requiring contribution to the cost of supervision. In all other respects the order appealed from is affirmed.

AFFIRMED as modified.

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

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged with violation of several conditions of his probation, one of which required that he pay $10.00 per month toward the cost of his supervision. Appellant did not pay the required fee for [1141]*1141his supervision and the court found him guilty of violation of several conditions of probation including the one requiring payment of the supervision fee. However, no evidence was adduced to show appellant had the ability to make said payments. Absent such proof the court if not authorized to find a violation of said condition. Robbins v. State, 318 So.2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). This does not require a reversal of the order of revocaiton because there is adequate proof of violation of the other conditions.

Accordingly, the order of revocation is remanded to the trial court with directions to delete the finding of a violation of condition (5) of the order of probation in failing to comply with Section 945.30, Florida Statutes, requiring contribution to the cost of supervision. In all other respects the order appealed from is affirmed.

AFFIRMED as modified.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

404 So. 2d 1140, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deason-v-state-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack