Southers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Southers v. State

547 So. 2d 725, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1953, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4643, 1989 WL 95293

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 18, 1989

DocketNo. 87-02678

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 547 So. 2d 725 (Southers 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

Southers v. State, 547 So. 2d 725, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1953, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4643, 1989 WL 95293 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find that the record on appeal contains substantial competent evidence upon which to base the trial court’s finding that appellant violated the terms and conditions of community control and probation. Accordingly, we affirm the orders of violation and the sentences imposed in connection therewith.

We do agree that the trial court’s written orders must be modified to conform to the findings made at the revocation hearing. Although both orders recite that appellant failed to maintain gainful employment, and that he failed to comply with certain instructions of his probation officer, no evidence was presented supporting these allegations. Similarly, the order revoking community control is in error when it recites that appellant left his home without permission on May 28 and June 7, 1987. The orders should be modified to delete these particular findings. Revear v. State, 497 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

CAMPBELL, C.J., and SCHEB and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find that the record on appeal contains substantial competent evidence upon which to base the trial court’s finding that appellant violated the terms and conditions of community control and probation. Accordingly, we affirm the orders of violation and the sentences imposed in connection therewith.

We do agree that the trial court’s written orders must be modified to conform to the findings made at the revocation hearing. Although both orders recite that appellant failed to maintain gainful employment, and that he failed to comply with certain instructions of his probation officer, no evidence was presented supporting these allegations. Similarly, the order revoking community control is in error when it recites that appellant left his home without permission on May 28 and June 7, 1987. The orders should be modified to delete these particular findings. Revear v. State, 497 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

CAMPBELL, C.J., and SCHEB and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

547 So. 2d 725, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1953, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4643, 1989 WL 95293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southers-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack