Hurst v. State
691 So. 2d 648, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4000, 1997 WL 186467
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 18, 1997·No. No. 95-04426·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Mr. Hurst challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress, having reserved the right to appeal that denial when he pleaded no contest to the charge of possession of cocaine. He also challenges Condition (18) of his probation because it was not orally imposed.
We affirm on the suppression issue but strike Condition (18) of Mr. Hurst’s probation. The State offers no objection to the striking of the probation condition, without remand.
We strike probation Condition (18) and otherwise affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hurst v. State, 691 So. 2d 648, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4000, 1997 WL 186467 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).
691 So. 2d 648 (Hurst v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Botelho v. State
691 So. 2d 648 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)