Dunn v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dunn v. State

185 So. 3d 694, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 1971, 2016 WL 542849

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 12, 2016

DocketNo. 5D14-4272

StatusPublished

This text of 185 So. 3d 694 (Dunn 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

Dunn v. State, 185 So. 3d 694, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 1971, 2016 WL 542849 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After' conducting a hearing, the lower court concluded that Appellant violated three conditions of his probation. He only-challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the Condition 5 violation. We affirm. See Bell v. State, 179 So.3d 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). We acknowledge conflict with Queior v. State, 157 So.3d 370 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 171 So.3d 120 (Fla.2015).

Appellant also challenges the imposition of Condition 30 in the probation1 order. Appellee correctly concedes error on this point. Witchard v. State, 68 So.3d 407, 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). Accordingly, we strike Condition 30 from the probation order.

AFFIRMED; CONDITION 30 STRICKEN.

LAWSON, C.J., TORPY.and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.

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