Richter v. State

629 So. 2d 157, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8496, 1993 WL 310729
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 18, 1993·No. No. 92-1863·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

STONE, Judge.

We reverse an order extending Appellant’s probation entered after the probationary term expired. Although hearings were conducted before the term expired, in an effort to resolve questions concerning the amount of restitution and Appellant’s obligation to pay as a condition of probation, no affidavit or warrant for Appellant’s violation for failure to pay restitution was pending when the term expired. Thereafter, the court had no jurisdiction to modify or extend the probation. Cf. Clark v. State, 579 So.2d 109 (Fla.1991); Shankweiler v. State, 427 So.2d 215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Frederick v. State, 405 So.2d 1344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

We remand with directions to vacate any orders entered subsequent to the April 23, 1992 termination date.

HERSEY and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

Richter v. State, 629 So. 2d 157, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8496, 1993 WL 310729 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

629 So. 2d 157 (Richter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cesaire v. State
811 So. 2d 816 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
FDIC v. Diamond C Nurseries, Inc.
629 So. 2d 157 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)