Flickinger v. State

636 So. 2d 601, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4988, 1994 WL 201272
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 24, 1994
DocketNo. 93-2899
StatusPublished

This text of 636 So. 2d 601 (Flickinger 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
Flickinger v. State, 636 So. 2d 601, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4988, 1994 WL 201272 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

It appearing that appellant’s probation was improperly revoked because the state failed to establish at the probation revocation hearing that the defendant committed, as charged, a new offense subsequent to being placed on probation (there being no evidence adduced as to when the new offense was committed) see and compare Stafford v. State, 465 So.2d 385 (Fla.1984), the order revoking same is reversed and the matter is returned to the trial court with directions to reestablish the probation.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

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

Related

Popwell v. Greene
465 So. 2d 384 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
636 So. 2d 601, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4988, 1994 WL 201272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flickinger-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.