V.B. v. State
This text of 75 So. 3d 363 (V.B. 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.
Opinion
Appellant correctly asserts, and the state properly concedes, the trial court erred in ordering restitution based upon hearsay evidence that was improperly ad[364]*364mitted at the restitution hearing over appellant’s objection. Butler v. State, 970 So.2d 919 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Forlano v. State, 964 So.2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); I.M. v. State, 958 So.2d 1014 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Herrington v. State, 828 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s restitution determination and remand for a new restitution hearing. Forlano, 964 So.2d at 246; Herrington, 823 So.2d at 286-87.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
75 So. 3d 363, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 18594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vb-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.