ELBERT BRINSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Elbert Brinson appeals his probation violation sentence, arguing the trial court failed to issue a written order specifying which conditions of probation were violated. The appellate court agrees and vacates the sentencing order, remanding for entry of a proper adjudication order with specific findings.
Yes. The trial court erred by not issuing a written order specifying which probationary conditions were violated. An order revoking probation must state in writing the specific probationary conditions found to have been violated.
[1] An order revoking probation must state in writing the specific probationary conditions that the trial court found to have been violated.
[2] Court minutes do not constitute appealable orders.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“an order revoking probation must state in writing the probationary conditions which the trial court found to have been violated”
Establishes the legal requirement that probation revocation orders must contain specific written findings regarding which conditions were violated
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrinson was charged with violating his probation in several ways. A hearing was held with testimony on each alleged violation. The trial court issued …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appealable Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PALMER, J.
Elbert Brinson (defendant) appeals the final order entered by the trial court sentencing him to a term of five years imprisonment for violating his probation. Concluding that the trial court erred by failing to issue a written order setting forth specific findings as to which conditions of the defendant’s probation had been violated, we vacate the sentencing order and remand for entry of a proper adjudication order. The State filed an affidavit charging the defendant with violating his probation in several different ways. A hearing was held and testimony was presented as to each of those alleged violations. At the conclusion of the testimony, the trial court issued a ruling from the bench finding that the defendant had violated his probation but not stating which of the conditions of probation had been violated. Defense counsel requested a specific finding of the conditions which had been violated; however, the court responded: “My order stands for itself.”
The trial court apparently failed to issue a written judgment of guilt since no adjudication order is contained in the record. However, a copy of the court minutes, signed by the trial court and indicating that the court had found the defendant guilty of violating his probation, is contained in the record. Defendant contends that the trial court reversibly erred in failing to issue a written order setting forth specific findings as to which conditions of his probation had been violated. We agree.
The supreme court has recently ruled that court minutes do not constitute appealable orders. See State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224 (Fla.2004). In addition, our court has consistently ruled that an order revoking probation must state in writing the probationary conditions which the trial court found to have been violated. Barta v. State, 678 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Forget v. State, 675 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). Accordingly, the trial court’s sentencing order is vacated and this matter is remanded for entry of a proper adjudication order. Sentencing order VACATED and case REMANDED for entry of a proper adjudication order. PLEUS and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Patt v. State, 876 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…ing to issue a written order setting forth said findings. While our court has consistently ruled that an order revoking community control must state in writing the conditions which the trial court found to have been violated, see Brinson v. State, 866 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Barta v. State, 678 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Forget v. State, 675 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), we recognize that the trial court made findings from the bench, supported by competent, substantial evidence, that would, i…
-
Mormon v. State, 976 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…f probation he violated. He argues that the judgment must, therefore, be vacated. We agree. This court has consistently held that the trial judge must specify in the written order or judgment what conditions the defendant violated. Brinson v. State, 866 So. 2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Barta v. State, 678 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Forget v. State, 675 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). We, therefore, vacate the judgment under review and remand for entry of a proper judgment specifying which conditions…
-
Bell v. State, 60 So. 3d 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…mpelled to remand because the trial court failed to enter a written order specifying the probation conditions violated.1 See Mormon v. State, 976 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Patt v. State, 876 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Brinson v. State, 866 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). We, therefore, vacate the judgment under review and remand for entry of a proper order specifying which conditions Bell was found to have violated. Judgment VACATED; case REMANDED for entry of a proper adjudication order.…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2004)
- Barta v. State, 678 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Gould v. State, 675 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)