In the Interest of B.S.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

In the Interest of B.S.

616 So. 2d 1231, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4937

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 5, 1993

DocketNos. 92-2213 to 92-2215

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 616 So. 2d 1231 (In the Interest of B.S.) 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

In the Interest of B.S., 616 So. 2d 1231, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4937 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals three juveniles were adjudicated as delinquents for burglary and grand theft and placed on community control with special conditions, including payment of restitution to the victim.

Contrary to appellants’ assertions, we find no error concerning the amount of restitution required to be made by each. The state concedes, on the authority of such cases as J.A.M. v. State, 601 So.2d 278 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and Rimmer v. State, 601 So.2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), the orders of restitution should be modified to provide that the respective appellants, presently unemployed, shall be obligated to begin paying restitution only upon obtaining earnings from employment that will permit compliance with the condition.

The order of community control with special condition requiring restitution are severally affirmed as to amount but remanded for modification consistent herewith.

ANSTEAD and STONE, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals three juveniles were adjudicated as delinquents for burglary and grand theft and placed on community control with special conditions, including payment of restitution to the victim.

Contrary to appellants’ assertions, we find no error concerning the amount of restitution required to be made by each. The state concedes, on the authority of such cases as J.A.M. v. State, 601 So.2d 278 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and Rimmer v. State, 601 So.2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), the orders of restitution should be modified to provide that the respective appellants, presently unemployed, shall be obligated to begin paying restitution only upon obtaining earnings from employment that will permit compliance with the condition.

The order of community control with special condition requiring restitution are severally affirmed as to amount but remanded for modification consistent herewith.

ANSTEAD and STONE, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

616 So. 2d 1231, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-bs-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack