Summary
holding that conditions concerning alcohol use and testing did not violate Biller because they were related to the offense, where the record revealed that “ appellant told police that he committed the offense because he was intoxicated.”
Summary of this case from Villanueva v. StateOpinion
No. 92-02576.
June 25, 1993.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier County; Ted H. Brousseau, Judge.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Deborah K. Brueckheimer, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Appellant, Miguel Angel Estrada, challenges certain conditions of his probation and the imposition of certain costs. We affirm.
We write only to explain that the conditions concerning alcohol use and testing do not violate Biller v. State, 618 So.2d 734 (Fla. 1993) because they were related to the offense for which appellant was convicted. The record reveals that appellant told police that he committed the offense because he was intoxicated.
We find no error in the other challenged condition and the imposition of costs and, accordingly, affirm.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and PARKER, JJ., concur.