T.W. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

T.W. v. State

576 So. 2d 936, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2625, 1991 WL 41019

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 28, 1991

DocketNo. 90-1806

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 576 So. 2d 936 (T.W. 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

T.W. v. State, 576 So. 2d 936, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2625, 1991 WL 41019 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

The juvenile appellant, T.W., challenges a restitution order imposed without an evi-dentiary hearing and without the submission by the state of any documentary or testimonial evidence in regard to the value of a wrecked vehicle.

At a disposition hearing, the prosecutor simply advised the court that he had spoken to the victim and was told that the vehicle had no insurance and was worth between $1,000.00 and $1,500.00. The trial court ordered restitution of $1,000.00, and expressly retained jurisdiction for the purpose of raising the amount of restitution ordered upon the presentation of further corroborative evidence. The defense objected to the absence of any admissible evidence as to damage. That objection should have been sustained. Accordingly, we reverse the restitution order entered below and remand for an evidentiary hearing thereon.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and HARRIS, JJ., concur.

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

COBB, Judge.

The juvenile appellant, T.W., challenges a restitution order imposed without an evi-dentiary hearing and without the submission by the state of any documentary or testimonial evidence in regard to the value of a wrecked vehicle.

At a disposition hearing, the prosecutor simply advised the court that he had spoken to the victim and was told that the vehicle had no insurance and was worth between $1,000.00 and $1,500.00. The trial court ordered restitution of $1,000.00, and expressly retained jurisdiction for the purpose of raising the amount of restitution ordered upon the presentation of further corroborative evidence. The defense objected to the absence of any admissible evidence as to damage. That objection should have been sustained. Accordingly, we reverse the restitution order entered below and remand for an evidentiary hearing thereon.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and HARRIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

576 So. 2d 936, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2625, 1991 WL 41019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tw-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack