MARKEESE S. MOSES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Willful Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
The State properly concedes that the trial court erred in finding that Appellant violated Conditions 2 and 15 of his probation. However, there was competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determination that Appellant willfully violated Condition 5 by committing a new crime. Our review of the record convinces us that based only on the finding that Appellant had willfully violated Condition 5, the trial court would have revoked Appellant’s probation and imposed the same sentence. Accordingly, remand for reconsideration of the order revoking probation or the sentence is not necessary. Lawson v. State, 941 So.2d 485, 488 n. 2 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), approved, 969 So.2d 222 (Fla.2007).
AFFIRMED; Findings as to Conditions 2 and 15 STRICKEN.
ORFINGER, C.J., SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Laing v. State, 200 So. 3d 166 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…ng State v. Carter, 835 So. 2d 259, 261 (Fla.2002)). A trial court’s determination that a probationer willfully and substantially violated a term or condition of his probation must be supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Moses v. State, 107 So. 3d 1224, 1224 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). The only evidence tending to prove that Laing violated his probation by falsely reporting his driving logs was the testimony of Officer Ciuzio. Officer Ciuzio did not have personal knowledge of La-ing’s whereabouts that c…
Authorities Cited
- Lawson v. State, 969 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2007)
- Lawson v. State, 941 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)