Hawthorne v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hawthorne v. State

462 So. 2d 602, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 234, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12120

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 24, 1985

DocketNo. AY-450

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 462 So. 2d 602 (Hawthorne 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

Hawthorne v. State, 462 So. 2d 602, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 234, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12120 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause must be reversed on the authority of Gammon v. State, 451 So.2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), because in revoking probation, in part due to appellant’s failure to pay restitution, the trial court failed to make a specific finding that appellant had the financial ability to pay. Since this court cannot determine whether the trial court would have revoked probation solely on the basis of appellant’s other violation of probation, failure to perform community service, we reverse the appellant’s probation revocation and remand for a determination as to whether appellant had the financial ability to pay restitution. If the trial court finds that appellant could not pay, it must then determine whether appellant’s probation should be revoked and whether the same sentence should be imposed for his failure to perform community service.

Accordingly, this cause is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., and TILLMAN PEARSON (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause must be reversed on the authority of Gammon v. State, 451 So.2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), because in revoking probation, in part due to appellant’s failure to pay restitution, the trial court failed to make a specific finding that appellant had the financial ability to pay. Since this court cannot determine whether the trial court would have revoked probation solely on the basis of appellant’s other violation of probation, failure to perform community service, we reverse the appellant’s probation revocation and remand for a determination as to whether appellant had the financial ability to pay restitution. If the trial court finds that appellant could not pay, it must then determine whether appellant’s probation should be revoked and whether the same sentence should be imposed for his failure to perform community service.

Accordingly, this cause is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., and TILLMAN PEARSON (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

462 So. 2d 602, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 234, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawthorne-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack