Hillman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hillman v. State

636 So. 2d 181, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3920, 1994 WL 157132

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 29, 1994

DocketNo. 93-1677

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 636 So. 2d 181 (Hillman 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

Hillman v. State, 636 So. 2d 181, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3920, 1994 WL 157132 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

Hillman appeals a special condition of his three-year probationary sentence, after he pled nolo contendere to burglary of a structure.¹ Hillman argues the trial court erred in setting a provision which requires restitution to be payable at a rate determined by his probation officer. We reverse because this court has held that it is improper for anyone other than a judge to set a payment schedule for amounts owed in restitution. Casto v. State, 615 So.2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Boss v. State, 613 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to set a payout rate on the restitution.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DIAMANTIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

W. SHARP, Judge.

Hillman appeals a special condition of his three-year probationary sentence, after he pled nolo contendere to burglary of a structure.¹ Hillman argues the trial court erred in setting a provision which requires restitution to be payable at a rate determined by his probation officer. We reverse because this court has held that it is improper for anyone other than a judge to set a payment schedule for amounts owed in restitution. Casto v. State, 615 So.2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Boss v. State, 613 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to set a payout rate on the restitution.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DIAMANTIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

636 So. 2d 181, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3920, 1994 WL 157132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hillman-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack