Channell v. State, 1D15–3859.
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM. |
| Citation | 200 So.3d 247 |
| Parties | James Justin CHANNELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 1D15–3859.,1D15–3859. |
| Decision Date | 04 October 2016 |
200 So.3d 247
James Justin CHANNELL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 1D15–3859.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Oct. 4, 2016.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Bureau Chief, and Jillian H. Reding, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals his judgment and sentence imposed following a hearing at which the trial court determined Appellant had violated his probation. We reverse.
On March 12, 2015, Appellant entered a negotiated plea of nolo contendere to the charge of child abuse without causing great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement. He was sentenced to sixty days in jail followed by three years of probation. As a condition of his probation, Appellant was instructed to wear an active Global Positioning System (“GPS”) ankle bracelet that would permit the probation office to monitor his daily movements, since he was prohibited from entering into certain areas of the surrounding neighborhood where the victim resided. For this purpose, Appellant not only received the ankle bracelet, but also a hand-held monitor with which he could call the probation office and receive calls from the monitoring center should there be an alert. On April 14, 2015, the state filed an eleven-count affidavit alleging ten counts of Appellant's having violated condition (10) of his probation for failing to submit to electronic monitoring, as evidenced by “bracelet gone” alerts received by the GPS monitoring company and reported to the probation office, and a violation of condition (9) for Appellant's failing to have complied with all instructions given by his probation officer. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court found Appellant guilty of violating only four of the counts concerning the “bracelet gone” alerts and entered an order to that effect. It then sentenced Appellant to eleven months and fifteen days in jail with credit for time served, plus two years of community control to be followed by two years of probation.
On appeal, Appellant argues the state's evidence was insufficient to prove the violations because it was based solely on hearsay. To be exact, Appellant claims the state did not lay the proper foundation for the introduction of the GPS notes from which his probation officer testified to account for the “bracelet gone” alerts. We concur. It is axiomatic that “[h]earsay is admissible in a probation or community control violation proceeding, but probation or community control may not be revoked solely on the basis of hearsay evidence.” Ruise v. State, 43 So.3d 885, 886–87 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (citing Smith–Curles v. State, 24 So.3d 702, 702–03 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) ). “Revocation may, however, be based solely upon hearsay evidence that
falls within an exception to the hearsay rule.” Id. at 887 (citing Thomas v. State, 711 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) ). Accord Eveland v. State, 189 So.3d 990, 991–92 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) ; Edwards v. State, 60 So.3d 529, 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011).
In Ruise, the only evidence the state presented in support of the allegation that Ruise...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R.L.G. v. State, 3D21-675
...such "GPS data ... is definitive hearsay" and "[n]o effort was made to utilize any exception to the hearsay rule."); Channell v. State, 200 So. 3d 247, 249 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (reversing a revocation of probation because the third-party GPS data on which it was based was "clearly hearsay" a......
-
Commonwealth v. Wallace, 2427 EDA 2019
...arguing that computer-generated GPS records qualify as hearsay, Wallace points to a single case from Florida, Channell v. State , 200 So.3d 247, 248-49 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016). There, the court found that the data recorded from a defendant's GPS monitoring device was " ‘clearly hearsay’ ......
-
R.L.G. v. State, 3D21-675
...such "GPS data . . . is definitive hearsay" and "[n]o effort was made to utilize any exception to the hearsay rule."); Channell v. State, 200 So. 3d 247, 249 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (reversing a revocation of probation because the third-party GPS data on which it was based was "clearly hearsay"......
-
Commonwealth v. Wallace, 93 MAP 2021
...aware of the competing views on GPS data as it relates to hearsay, Appellant relied heavily on a case from Florida, Channell v. State, 200 So.3d 247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016). Therein, the Florida court held that GPS data created from the defendant's electronic monitoring bracelet was hear......
-
Judgment and sentence
...the hearsay rule, as the state failed to lay the proper foundation for such evidence to be declared a business record. Channell v. State, 200 So. 3d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) Trial court’s sentencing consideration of pending, unrelated charge is a violation of defendant’s right to due process......