Goodman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Goodman v. State

100 So. 3d 1245, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 19746, 2012 WL 5499996

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 14, 2012·No. No. 4D12-34·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the revocation of appellant’s probation and resulting sentence. See Sinclair v. State, 995 So.2d 552, 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (“[A] sufficiently experienced officer may opine regarding the identity of crack cocaine.”). Appellant’s additional contention that section 893.13, Florida Statutes (2011), is facially unconstitutional is without merit. State v. Adkins, 96 So.3d 412 (Fla.2012). We, however, remand this case for entry of a written order revoking appellant’s probation which specifies the condition appellant was found to have violated. See Harris v. State, 961 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

Affirmed and remanded.

STEVENSON, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the revocation of appellant’s probation and resulting sentence. See Sinclair v. State, 995 So.2d 552, 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (“[A] sufficiently experienced officer may opine regarding the identity of crack cocaine.”). Appellant’s additional contention that section 893.13, Florida Statutes (2011), is facially unconstitutional is without merit. State v. Adkins, 96 So.3d 412 (Fla.2012). We, however, remand this case for entry of a written order revoking appellant’s probation which specifies the condition appellant was found to have violated. See Harris v. State, 961 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

Affirmed and remanded.

STEVENSON, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

Goodman v. State, 100 So. 3d 1245, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 19746, 2012 WL 5499996 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

100 So. 3d 1245 (Goodman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related