Opinion

Smith v. State

  • 690 So. 2d 733
  • 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3131
  • 1997 WL 149394
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
Apr 2, 1997
Status
Published
On the bench
Farmer, Gross, Stevenson
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 72.7%

concluding that testimony of probation officer that probationer's grandmother told him that probationer no longer lived at residence, without non-hearsay evidence, was insufficient to support probation revocation

How later courts described this case

  • concluding that testimony of probation officer that probationer's grandmother told him that probationer no longer lived at residence, without non-hearsay evidence, was insufficient to support probation revocation
  • testimony of probation officer that probationer’s grandmother told him that probationer no longer lived at residence, without non-hearsay evidence, was insufficient to support probation revocation

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court found appellant, Brian Smith, to be in violation of his probation for changing his residence without the consent of his probation officer and attempted burglary. The only evidence of a change of residence was the probation officer’s testimony that Smith’s grandmother had said that Smith moved in with his girlfriend. Although hearsay is admissible in revocation proceedings, a court cannot revoke probation based solely on a hearsay statement by a family member to a probation officer that the probationer does not live at a certain address. Brown v. State, 659 So.2d 1260, 1261-62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). There was no other evidence on this portion of the charge. Compare Dunham v. State, 683 So.2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), aff'd, 686 So.2d 1356 , 22 Fla. L. Weekly S49 (Fla. Jan. 23, 1997). We therefore reverse the finding of a violation of probation on that ground.

As to the other violation, we find no abuse of discretion. See Bernhardt v. State, 288 So.2d 490, 501 (Fla.1974). Because we cannot tell from this record whether the court would have revoked probation or whether Smith’s sentence would have been the same had the court found only one violation, we remand the case to the trial court.. Brown, 659 So.2d at 1262 . On remand, if the court determines that revocation is still appropriate, it must enter a written order of revocation. E.g., Horne v. State, 675 So.2d 247 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

FARMER, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.