Mitchem v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mitchem v. State

399 So. 2d 479, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20086

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 9, 1981

DocketNo. VV-13

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 399 So. 2d 479 (Mitchem 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

Mitchem v. State, 399 So. 2d 479, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20086 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from an order revoking his probation on the grounds that he committed three separate armed robberies. Although there is sufficient evidence to support the finding that defendant robbed Nugget Oil Store # 7 and we affirm the order of revocation on this ground, there was no evidence introduced at the violation of probation hearing to support the findings that defendant also robbed Nugget Oil Store # 11 and a Taco Rancho Restaurant. Therefore, we remand the case to the trial court with instructions to strike that portion of the order of revocation of probation finding defendant robbed Nugget Oil Store #11 and the Taco Rancho Restaurant. Otherwise, that portion of the order revoking defendant’s probation on the finding that he robbed Nugget Oil Store # 7 is affirmed.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

McCORD, BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from an order revoking his probation on the grounds that he committed three separate armed robberies. Although there is sufficient evidence to support the finding that defendant robbed Nugget Oil Store # 7 and we affirm the order of revocation on this ground, there was no evidence introduced at the violation of probation hearing to support the findings that defendant also robbed Nugget Oil Store # 11 and a Taco Rancho Restaurant. Therefore, we remand the case to the trial court with instructions to strike that portion of the order of revocation of probation finding defendant robbed Nugget Oil Store #11 and the Taco Rancho Restaurant. Otherwise, that portion of the order revoking defendant’s probation on the finding that he robbed Nugget Oil Store # 7 is affirmed.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

McCORD, BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

399 So. 2d 479, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20086, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchem-v-state-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack