Wearen v. State

570 So. 2d 1081, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9108, 1990 WL 191966
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 4, 1990·No. No. 90-154·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court revoked the appellant’s probation on the basis that he was in possession of cocaine, possession of a firearm, and committed a strong-arm robbery. Other than the violation for possession of a firearm, the violation was based only on [1082]*1082hearsay testimony, and this was not sufficient. Davis v. State, 510 So.2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Wallace v. State, 440 So.2d 58 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Combs v. State, 351 So.2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). However, one of the grounds for violation being properly established, we affirm the order revoking probation. Casana v. State, 546 So.2d 794 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Underwood v. State, 455 So.2d 1133 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Gadson v. State, 368 So.2d 429 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Coxon v. State, 365 So.2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).

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

Wearen v. State, 570 So. 2d 1081, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9108, 1990 WL 191966 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

570 So. 2d 1081 (Wearen v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. State
678 So. 2d 12 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Argote v. State
573 So. 2d 1068 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)