Lachle v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lachle v. State

412 So. 2d 931, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19781

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 15, 1982

DocketNo. AE-330

StatusPublished

This text of 412 So. 2d 931 (Lachle 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

Lachle v. State, 412 So. 2d 931, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19781 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

WIGGINTON, Judge.

This appeal is from the order of the trial court revoking appellant’s probation on the basis of an alleged misrepresentation made by appellant during the initial hearing. We hold the trial court was incorrect in revoking appellant’s probation when the conduct, upon which the State relied to show a violation of probation, did not violate a specific condition of probation or occur before the order of probation was imposed. § 948.-06(1), Fla.Stat. (1981); O’Steen v. State, 261 So.2d 208 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972); Suarez v. State, 391 So.2d 343 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Sutton v. State, 348 So.2d 626 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Morgan v. State, 341 So.2d 201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).

Accordingly, the order of the trial court is vacated and the original order withholding adjudication of guilt and placing appellant on probation is reinstated. The cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter an order consistent with this opinion.

JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

WIGGINTON, Judge.

This appeal is from the order of the trial court revoking appellant’s probation on the basis of an alleged misrepresentation made by appellant during the initial hearing. We hold the trial court was incorrect in revoking appellant’s probation when the conduct, upon which the State relied to show a violation of probation, did not violate a specific condition of probation or occur before the order of probation was imposed. § 948.-06(1), Fla.Stat. (1981); O’Steen v. State, 261 So.2d 208 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972); Suarez v. State, 391 So.2d 343 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Sutton v. State, 348 So.2d 626 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Morgan v. State, 341 So.2d 201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).

Accordingly, the order of the trial court is vacated and the original order withholding adjudication of guilt and placing appellant on probation is reinstated. The cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter an order consistent with this opinion.

JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

412 So. 2d 931, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lachle-v-state-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack