C.B.H. v. State, No. 2D12–3874.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtBLACK
Citation117 So.3d 450
PartiesC.B.H., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 2D12–3874.
Decision Date10 July 2013

117 So.3d 450

C.B.H., Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2D12–3874.

District Court of Appeal of Florida,
Second District.

July 10, 2013.


Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; James Pierce, Acting Circuit Judge.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Bruce P. Taylor, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Christina Zuccaro, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


BLACK, Judge.

C.B.H., a juvenile, challenges the revocation of his probation and his commitment to the Department of Juvenile Justice based thereon. We agree with C.B.H.'s contention that the revocation was based solely upon hearsay and, accordingly, we reverse.

During the violation of probation hearing, Officer Richard Schmidt testified that on February 23, 2012, he went to the home of C.B.H., who was in the care and custody of his mother, in response to a report for a runaway juvenile. The officer testified that he spoke with C.B.H.'s mother outside of the home and that she told him C.B.H. was not home, in violation of his curfew. The officer also testified that he did not search the house. C.B.H.'s mother did not testify at the hearing. The trial court found C.B.H. to be in violation of his probation for failing to adhere to his curfew, adjudicated him delinquent, and committed him to the Department of Juvenile Justice.

Though hearsay testimony is admissible to assist in establishing a probation violation, “ ‘a revocation of probation finding cannot be based solely upon hearsay testimony.’ ” Miffin v. State, 19 So.3d 377, 378 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (quoting Dean v. State, 948 So.2d 1042, 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)). C.B.H. correctly asserts that the trial court revoked his probation based solely upon the hearsay testimony of the officer. See Grimsley v. State, 830 So.2d 118, 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (concluding that testimony of officer that an individual from probationer's approved residence told her that probationer no longer lived there was hearsay and, without nonhearsay evidence, was insufficient to support probation revocation); Smith v. State, 690 So.2d 733, 734 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (concluding same); see also Kipp v. State, 657 So.2d 931, 932 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (concluding that testimony of officer that probationer did not report as required, which was based solely on her review of the probation office sign-in log not admitted into evidence, was hearsay and insufficient to support probation...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Savage v. State, No. 2D12–2269.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 30, 2013
    ...its weight). The evidence must meet technical requirements to support a finding that a violation occurred. See, e.g., C.B.H. v. State, 117 So.3d 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (reversing revocation where only evidence of violation was hearsay, which, without nonhearsay evidence, was insufficient); ......
  • White v. State, No. 1D14–3757.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 8, 2015
    ...v. State, 24 So.3d 702, 702–03 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) ; Stewart v. State, 926 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) ; C.B.H. v. State, 117 So.3d 450, 451 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (concluding that a probation officer's testimony was insufficient to support probation revocation where the probation office......
  • Rivera v. State, No. 2D12–2187.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 10, 2013
    ...Holmes v. State, 84 So.3d 421, 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (remanding for correction of written sentences to conform to oral pronouncements); [117 So.3d 450]Rivera v. State, 34 So.3d 207, 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (recognizing that the written sentences must conform to the oral pronouncement). In a......
3 cases
  • Savage v. State, No. 2D12–2269.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 30, 2013
    ...its weight). The evidence must meet technical requirements to support a finding that a violation occurred. See, e.g., C.B.H. v. State, 117 So.3d 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (reversing revocation where only evidence of violation was hearsay, which, without nonhearsay evidence, was insufficient); ......
  • White v. State, No. 1D14–3757.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 8, 2015
    ...v. State, 24 So.3d 702, 702–03 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) ; Stewart v. State, 926 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) ; C.B.H. v. State, 117 So.3d 450, 451 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (concluding that a probation officer's testimony was insufficient to support probation revocation where the probation office......
  • Rivera v. State, No. 2D12–2187.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 10, 2013
    ...Holmes v. State, 84 So.3d 421, 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (remanding for correction of written sentences to conform to oral pronouncements); [117 So.3d 450]Rivera v. State, 34 So.3d 207, 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (recognizing that the written sentences must conform to the oral pronouncement). In a......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT