Savaria v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Savaria v. State

526 So. 2d 1014, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1433, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2528, 1988 WL 60467

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 15, 1988

DocketNo. 87-1423

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 526 So. 2d 1014 (Savaria 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

Savaria v. State, 526 So. 2d 1014, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1433, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2528, 1988 WL 60467 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

THREADGILL, Judge.

The appellant challenges the trial court’s revocation of his community control and sentence to three and one-half years in prison for violating numerous conditions of his community control. We find the testimony elicited from the appellant’s probation officer sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that multiple conditions of community control had been violated. We therefore, affirm the revocation of community control.

We, however, agree with the appellant that the trial court erred in including the substantive offense of burglary as a violation. The court specifically stated on the record that it would not consider this as a violation of community control. See Robinson v. State, 468 So.2d 1106 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Thus, the revocation order should be modified to delete this charge. Accordingly, we affirm the order revoking the appellant’s community control and subsequent sentence but remand for correction of the order of revocation. See Brouillett v. State, 373 So.2d 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).

Affirmed in part; remanded in part.

RYDER, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.

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

THREADGILL, Judge.

The appellant challenges the trial court’s revocation of his community control and sentence to three and one-half years in prison for violating numerous conditions of his community control. We find the testimony elicited from the appellant’s probation officer sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that multiple conditions of community control had been violated. We therefore, affirm the revocation of community control.

We, however, agree with the appellant that the trial court erred in including the substantive offense of burglary as a violation. The court specifically stated on the record that it would not consider this as a violation of community control. See Robinson v. State, 468 So.2d 1106 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Thus, the revocation order should be modified to delete this charge. Accordingly, we affirm the order revoking the appellant’s community control and subsequent sentence but remand for correction of the order of revocation. See Brouillett v. State, 373 So.2d 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).

Affirmed in part; remanded in part.

RYDER, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

526 So. 2d 1014, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1433, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2528, 1988 WL 60467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/savaria-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack