From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lattimore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 21, 1983
433 So. 2d 56 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

No. 82-1964.

June 21, 1983.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Robert P. Kaye, Judge.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Rory S. Stein, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Richard E. Doran, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and FERGUSON, JJ.


We vacate two of the three bases upon which defendant was found in violation of his probation because the state failed to demonstrate at the hearing: (a) that the defendant had willfully and not without fault failed to maintain employment, Chatman v. State, 365 So.2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); and (b) that he had the financial ability to pay for the cost of his probationary supervision, Smith v. State, 373 So.2d 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). In all other respects, the order of revocation of probation and entry of judgment and sentence thereon are affirmed.

Affirmed as modified.


Summaries of

Lattimore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 21, 1983
433 So. 2d 56 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

Lattimore v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAMES LATTIMORE, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 21, 1983

Citations

433 So. 2d 56 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing Cases

Pope v. State

A defendant may not be found guilty of a violation of probation for failure to pay costs of supervision…