Dominguez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dominguez v. State

848 So. 2d 1198, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9916, 2003 WL 21503385

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 2, 2003

DocketNo. 3D02-3254

StatusPublished

This text of 848 So. 2d 1198 (Dominguez 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

Dominguez v. State, 848 So. 2d 1198, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9916, 2003 WL 21503385 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

SHEVIN, Judge.

We reverse the order revoking defendant’s community control on ground one, failure to pay restitution, based on the state’s proper concession. We also reverse the revocation as to ground two, failure to perform monthly community service hours, on the authority of Davis v. State, 697 So.2d 895 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). The state argued in the trial court that defendant failed to complete the 30 hours required for the period in question. However, defendant had completed 18 hours in that period. Here, as in Davis, defendant substantially performed community service hours during the time he was on community control, and there is no evidence of a willful and substantial violation of this requirement.

Accordingly the order is reversed and the case remanded for resentencing in view of the fact that defendant has served one year in prison as a result of the violation.

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

SHEVIN, Judge.

We reverse the order revoking defendant’s community control on ground one, failure to pay restitution, based on the state’s proper concession. We also reverse the revocation as to ground two, failure to perform monthly community service hours, on the authority of Davis v. State, 697 So.2d 895 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). The state argued in the trial court that defendant failed to complete the 30 hours required for the period in question. However, defendant had completed 18 hours in that period. Here, as in Davis, defendant substantially performed community service hours during the time he was on community control, and there is no evidence of a willful and substantial violation of this requirement.

Accordingly the order is reversed and the case remanded for resentencing in view of the fact that defendant has served one year in prison as a result of the violation.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

848 So. 2d 1198, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9916, 2003 WL 21503385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dominguez-v-state-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack