Lynn v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lynn v. State

2 So. 3d 1088, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2915, 2009 WL 347768

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 13, 2009

Docket5D08-744

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 2 So. 3d 1088 (Lynn 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

Lynn v. State, 2 So. 3d 1088, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2915, 2009 WL 347768 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Rashean Lynn appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probation and sentencing him to fifteen years in prison for his earlier conviction of trafficking in cocaine. The trial court concluded that Lynn violated his probation by committing a new law violation (or several of them), and by changing his residence without first procuring the consent of his probation officer. As to the former violation, we affirm without further discussion. As to the latter, we must reverse as no violation regarding a change of residence condition was alleged. Revoking probation for conduct not charged is fundamental error. Smith v. State, 738 So.2d 433, 435 (Fla. 1st DCA1999).

We affirm the revocation of Lynn’s probation and the sentence imposed. We remand with directions to enter an order of revocation of probation deleting any reference to a condition three (change of residence) violation, as no such allegation was made against Lynn.

AFFIRMED IN PART; and REMANDED.

PALMER, C.J., SAWAYA and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Rashean Lynn appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probation and sentencing him to fifteen years in prison for his earlier conviction of trafficking in cocaine. The trial court concluded that Lynn violated his probation by committing a new law violation (or several of them), and by changing his residence without first procuring the consent of his probation officer. As to the former violation, we affirm without further discussion. As to the latter, we must reverse as no violation regarding a change of residence condition was alleged. Revoking probation for conduct not charged is fundamental error. Smith v. State, 738 So.2d 433, 435 (Fla. 1st DCA1999).

We affirm the revocation of Lynn’s probation and the sentence imposed. We remand with directions to enter an order of revocation of probation deleting any reference to a condition three (change of residence) violation, as no such allegation was made against Lynn.

AFFIRMED IN PART; and REMANDED.

PALMER, C.J., SAWAYA and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 So. 3d 1088, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2915, 2009 WL 347768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lynn-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack