Palag v. State

622 So. 2d 1151, 1993 WL 310684
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 18, 1993
Docket93-191
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 622 So. 2d 1151 (Palag 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
Palag v. State, 622 So. 2d 1151, 1993 WL 310684 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

622 So.2d 1151 (1993)

Peggy L. PALAG, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 93-191.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

August 18, 1993.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Chris W. Hoeg, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Joe Garwood, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the provisions of her community control order which require her to maintain an hourly accounting of her activities in a daily log, and require her to make restitution in the amount of $26,974.00. We reverse as to those conditions and remand for further proceedings.

The condition of community control requiring appellant to maintain a daily log containing an hourly accounting of her activities was not pronounced orally at sentencing, and is not authorized by statute. Therefore, this condition must be stricken. Black v. State, 614 So.2d 1220 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Vinyard v. State, 586 So.2d 1301 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). See also Nichols v. State, 528 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). The parties recognize that the provisions of section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, place a defendant on constructive notice that restitution may be ordered. Reynolds v. State, 598 So.2d 188, 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Nevertheless, it is improper to establish a restitution amount without affording the defendant prior notice and an opportunity to be heard on the issue. Reynolds, 598 So.2d at 190; Harris v. *1152 State, 593 So.2d 1169, 1171 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The state concedes the trial court erred in imposing a restitution amount in the written judgment, when the amount was not mentioned at the revocation proceeding. Moreover, the record before this court is silent with regard to the manner in which the restitution amount was determined.

Accordingly, this cause is remanded with directions to strike community control condition thirteen, requiring appellant to maintain an hourly record of her activities, and to conduct a hearing on the amount of restitution appellant will be required to pay.

ZEHMER, C.J., and JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Jaffe v. State
712 So. 2d 464 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Owens v. State
691 So. 2d 41 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Bowers v. State
679 So. 2d 340 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Visage v. State
664 So. 2d 1101 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Duby v. State
651 So. 2d 800 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Hamrick v. State
648 So. 2d 274 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
622 So. 2d 1151, 1993 WL 310684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palag-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.