From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 5, 1985
475 So. 2d 272 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Opinion

No. 85-221.

September 5, 1985.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Broward County, Harry G. Hinckley, Jr., J.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Margaret Good, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Noel A. Pelella, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


We reverse the order revoking probation and remand this matter to the trial court for reconsideration because we find that only one ground for revocation is sustainable on appeal, that of failure to file monthly reports. The violations added after the term of probation had ended cannot be prosecuted. Clark v. State, 402 So.2d 43 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). The violations concerning defaults in payment of costs fail because of lack of proof of ability to pay.

While the failure to file monthly reports may be a proper basis, of itself, to revoke probation, such a violation is a technical one and, depending on the circumstances surrounding such violation, may cause a trial court to decide that probation should be revoked and incarceration or some other alternative besides probation utilized. See Davis v. State, 474 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).

DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

LETTS, J., specially concurs with opinion.


I specially concur because I do not believe the majority opinion stresses that the trial judge, upon remand, may come to the same conclusion as he did before.

I am also apprehensive that it appear we are suggesting that monthly reports are but "technical" niceties. True, they involve some paper work compliance by the supervisor and certainly, a failure to report does not rise to the level of an armed robbery. Nonetheless, by definition, probation envisions supervision and control by the department of corrections. Among other normal requirements of this supervision and control, is the duty to report to the probation supervisor [see section 948.03(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1983)]. Without such reporting, coupled with the monster case load endured by probation officers, there will be, as a practical consequence, no control and no supervision — ergo non-existent probation.

Accordingly, I view failure to report as a serious violation of probation regardless of any technicalities involved in the manner of its fulfillment.


Summaries of

Williams v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 5, 1985
475 So. 2d 272 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)
Case details for

Williams v. State

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR JAMES WILLIAMS, A/K/A JAMES EDWARD SMITH, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Sep 5, 1985

Citations

475 So. 2d 272 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Citing Cases

Smith v. State

We previously reversed and remanded because we concluded that only one of the grounds recited by the trial…

Molly v. State

We find no error in the trial court's modification of appellant's probation. Williams v. State, 475 So.2d 272…