From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miranda v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 9, 2005
909 So. 2d 997 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5D04-4074.

September 9, 2005.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lake County, Mark J. Hill, Judge.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Rose M. Levering, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lamya A. Henry, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.


Fransisco E. Miranda appeals the trial court's order revoking his probation. He contends that the affidavit alleging the violation of probation was fundamentally defective because it was not sworn to before a person authorized to administer oaths, nor was it verified as set forth in section 92.525(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2005). In Smartmays v. State, 901 So.2d 278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), this Court decided this same issue adversely to Miranda's position. Smartmays, while recognizing that the affidavit alleging a violation of probation failed to be properly sworn to, concluded that such non-compliance, while error, was not the type of defect that is considered fundamental, particularly in a revocation of probation context. Consequently, because the issue was not raised in the trial court, it was waived.

AFFIRMED.

PLEUS, C.J., and GRIFFIN J., concur.


Summaries of

Miranda v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 9, 2005
909 So. 2d 997 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

Miranda v. State

Case Details

Full title:Fransisco E. MIRANDA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Sep 9, 2005

Citations

909 So. 2d 997 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)