Tobias v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tobias v. State

641 So. 2d 194, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8354, 1994 WL 457157

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 24, 1994

DocketNo. 93-3532

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 641 So. 2d 194 (Tobias 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

Tobias v. State, 641 So. 2d 194, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8354, 1994 WL 457157 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s revocation of appellant’s probation, resulting in the imposition of a sentence to concurrent terms of twenty and ten years was based solely on a violation of Condition 3, which violation read:

VIOLATION OF CONDITION THREE (3) of the Orders of Community Control, by changing his residence without first procuring the consent of his Community Control Officer, and as grounds for belief that he violated his Community Control, affiant states that on or about September 13, 1993, the aforesaid did move from his approved residence at 17660 Bridle Court, Jupiter, Florida, as told to affiant by Mrs. Elizabeth Howard, aforesaid’s girlfriend’s mother, on September 16, 1993.

What the evidence established was a violation of Condition 11 — requiring that appellant remain confined to his approved residence — for which he was not charged although such charge would have fit these facts, i.e., where a defendant is gone for a brief period of time but his locations are unknown. The evidence did not support a finding that Condition 3 was violated. We therefore reverse.

GLICKSTEIN and WARNER, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., dissents with opinion.

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