Borges v. State, 71--136
| Decision Date | 22 June 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 71--136,71--136 |
| Citation | 249 So.2d 513 |
| Parties | Roy Anthony BORGES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kimler, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before CHARLES CARROLL, BARKDULL and SWANN, JJ.
The appellant was originally charged with buying, receiving and concealing stolen property. He pleaded guilty and was placed on probation. The order of probation, among other things, contained the following provisions: 'Avoid injurious or vicious habits; avoid association with persons of harmful character or bad reputation.' 'Live and remain at liberty without violating any law.' Subsequent thereto, his probation officer filed appropriate notice of revocation of probation, alleging:
'He has been associating with one Howard Lester Johnson, a person known to police authorities to be a person of harmful character and bad reputation.
'On May 13, 1970, Aforesaid failed to follow the instructions of his probation supervisor while being booked for violation of probation, and did, in fact, escape from custody.'
The revocation proceeding was scheduled for hearing and, prior thereto, the State had filed a new information against the appellant and Howard Lester Johnson, charging them with the commission of a felony (exact charge not reflected in the record). At the time of the revocation proceedings, the trial had not been had on this information. Counsel for the appellant attempted to secure an order from the trial court continuing the revocation proceedings until the trial on the second information could be had, contending it would violate the appellant's due process to require him to proceed with the revocation proceedings when he might possibly subject himself to a violation of the privilege against self-incrimination if he took the stand in the revocation proceedings. The trial judge denied this request, and proceeded with the matter; heard evidence which clearly indicated that the appellant had violated the terms of his probation in several instances, revoked same, and duly sentenced him. This appeal ensued. The only point preserved for review was the failure of the trial judge to postpone the revocation proceedings until a time subsequent to the trial on the pending information.
We find no merit in this point. Probation is a privilege accorded...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Kates
...was so notwithstanding the fact that when brought to trial on the robbery charge, petitioner was acquitted. Similarly, in Borges v. State, 249 So.2d 513 (Fla.App.1971), the court specifically held that 'the mere fact that subsequent criminal proceedings may have been pending against the pro......
-
Dail v. State
...violation proceeding prior to trial on related criminal charges. See People v. Carr, 185 Colo. 293, 524 P.2d 301 (1974); Borges v. State, 249 So.2d 513 (Fla.App.1971); State v. Ryan, 166 Mont. 419, 533 P.2d 1076 (1975); State v. Kartman, 192 Neb. 803, 224 N.W.2d 753 (1975); State v. Randall......
-
Bernhardt v. State
...conviction of a crime is not essential to enable the judge to revoke an order of probation. Brill v. State, supra; See also Borges v. State, 249 So.2d 513 (Fla.1971); Roberts v. State, 154 So.2d 695 (Fla.App.1963). Specifically in State v. Cochran, supra, this Court '(6) Recurring now to th......
-
State v. Robinson
...1026, 95 S.Ct. 505, 42 L.Ed.2d 301 (1974); People v. Coleman, 13 Cal.3d 867, 533 P.2d 1024, 120 Cal.Rptr. 384 (1975); Borges v. State, 249 So.2d 513 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1971); Evans v. State, 153 Ga.App. 764, 266 S.E.2d 545 (1980); People v. Woodall, 44 Ill.App.3d 1003, 3 Ill.Dec. 582, 587, 35......