RF v. State
This text of 549 So. 2d 1169 (RF 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.
Opinion
R.F., a Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Alan W. Kaback, Coral Springs, for appellant.
*1170 Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Carol Cobourn, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
We reverse that portion of the order on restitution awarding Marjorie Lois Geprich the sum of $15,000 to be paid by the appellant.
In the instant case, contrary to the requirements of section 39.11(1)(a)1, Florida Statute (1987), there was no determination by the court that the amount of restitution ordered by the court was an amount the child could reasonably be expected to pay. In effect, the trial court acknowledged several times at the restitution hearing that the $15,000 the court ordered as restitution would inevitably be uncollectible. Accordingly, we reverse that portion of the order on restitution awarding Marjorie Lois Geprich the sum of $15,000 to be paid by the appellant. In all other respects we affirm the order on restitution as it relates to appellant.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DELL, GUNTHER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
549 So. 2d 1169, 1989 WL 118637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rf-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.