G.A.Z. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

G.A.Z. v. State

657 So. 2d 1244, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7332, 1995 WL 396374

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 7, 1995·No. No. 94-01273·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the amount ordered for restitution because there was sufficient competent evidence to find (1) that the appellant took the signet ring the victim inherited from her father during the burglary for which he was adjudicated delinquent and (2) the ring’s replacement value. However, we strike that part of the order delegating the responsibility for setting the terms and conditions of the payment of the restitution. Only the trial court may set such terms. Denson v. State, 493 So.2d 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); McDonald v. State, 478 So.2d 113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

We remand for further proceedings so the trial court may set the terms and conditions of repayment.

THREADGILL, C.J., and DANAHY and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the amount ordered for restitution because there was sufficient competent evidence to find (1) that the appellant took the signet ring the victim inherited from her father during the burglary for which he was adjudicated delinquent and (2) the ring’s replacement value. However, we strike that part of the order delegating the responsibility for setting the terms and conditions of the payment of the restitution. Only the trial court may set such terms. Denson v. State, 493 So.2d 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); McDonald v. State, 478 So.2d 113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

We remand for further proceedings so the trial court may set the terms and conditions of repayment.

THREADGILL, C.J., and DANAHY and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

G.A.Z. v. State, 657 So. 2d 1244, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7332, 1995 WL 396374 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

657 So. 2d 1244 (G.A.Z. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related