Holt v. State

646 So. 2d 844, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12535, 1994 WL 704801
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holt v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4200
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 20, 1994·No. No. 94-1663·Published

Opinion

WOLF, Judge.

Appellant, Dominiche Vance Holt, challenges the imposition of adult sanctions without a written order sufficiently addressing the statutory criteria and requirement of section 39.059(7)(c) and (d). We agree with appellant that the court failed to comply with the statute, and reverse and remand for re-sentencing in compliance with section 39.059(7)(c) and (d), Florida Statutes. Trout-man v. State, 630 So.2d 528 (Fla.1993); Clayton v. State, 636 So.2d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).

Appellant also challenges the order imposing restitution as a condition of probation. To the extent that the order purports to delegate responsibility to the probation officer to schedule restitution payments, we find the order to be in error. Smith v. State, 613 So.2d 1325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).

Upon resentencing, the trial court shall comply with the dictates of Smith, swpra.

WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

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

Holt v. State, 646 So. 2d 844, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12535, 1994 WL 704801 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

646 So. 2d 844 (Holt v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
613 So. 2d 1325 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Clayton v. State
636 So. 2d 596 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)