STENIO CHARLES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
STENIO CHARLES, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
558 So. 2d 545
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1990)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The State concedes that it was error for the trial court to revoke the defendant’s probation when the only evidence presented at the probation violation hearing was hearsay testimony. Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
Accordingly, the order revoking probation is hereby reversed, with this cause being remanded without prejudice to the filing of “a further affidavit and further proceedings upon the violation upon which hearing was had.” Hampton v. State, 276 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). See Miller v. State, 444 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Purvis v. State, 420 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Reeves v. State, 366 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); White v. State, 301 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mitchell v. State, 607 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…543 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Randolph v. State, 292 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 300 So. 2d 901 (1974). However, a revocation of probation may not be based solely upon hearsay testimony. Frazier, 587 So. 2d at 661; Charles v. State, 558 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). In this case, the only evidence of the defendant’s failure to file written reports was the hearsay testimony of Ms. Jones. While clearly admissible, this testimony alone was ins…
Authorities Cited
- White v. State, 301 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Hampton v. State, 276 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Reeves v. State, 366 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Purvis v. State, 420 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Miller v. State, 444 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)