Palma v. State, 5D01-3599.

Decision Date08 November 2002
Docket NumberNo. 5D01-3599.,5D01-3599.
Citation830 So.2d 201
PartiesLisa PALMA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Anne Moorman Reeves, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lamya A. Henry, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

THOMPSON, C.J.

Lisa Palma ("Palma") appeals the revocation of her probation. We affirm.

After Palma was sentenced for a previous violation and a new offense, Palma filed a motion to modify the sentences. Palma's motion alleged that Avon Park Medical Center, the facility recommended by the court, would not provide appropriate treatment for her psychological problems and substance abuse, but that the Bridge Program would provide such treatment. Palma also agreed to any and all counseling and mental health treatment modalities recommended by the Bridge Program. The trial court ordered Palma to enter the Bridge Program within three days of release from prison and to complete the six month program. Palma failed to complete the Bridge Program, which is the basis for the probation revocation which she now appeals. Palma left the facility, was arrested, and was terminated from the program. The affidavit of probation violation alleged that Palma had absconded from the program, that she had been a constant disciplinary problem, and that she continued to break the rules of the program.

There was conflicting evidence regarding whether Palma had intended to abscond from the Bridge Program, but, Robert Kline, a Bridge Program staff member assigned to supervise Palma's case, testified that the Bridge Program director had intended to terminate Palma from the program prior to Palma leaving the facility because Palma was disruptive, and would not follow the facility's rules. While he never witnessed Palma's disruptive behavior, Kline constantly received reports of Palma's disruptive outbursts and serious violations of the Bridge Program's rules.

Palma's mother testified that Palma had stopped taking her medication for her bipolar disorder while she was in prison prior to entering the Bridge Program.

Axia Rivera, Palma's counselor at the Bridge Program, testified that she witnessed some of Palma's disruptive behavior. The counselor testified that Palma did not have all her medications when she began the program, and that it was very likely that Palma's medication had not taken effect by the time Palma was terminated. Rivera conceded that she was not a specialist in psychiatric disorders, but opined that those with psychiatric disorders tend to lie and to have problems following the rules. Palma's counselor recommended that Palma be placed in a "dual diagnose program."

The trial court found Palma guilty of violating her probation and sentenced Palma to prison. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court stated:

I'm also going to recommend that upon her arrival at the Department of Corrections [sic] that the Department give her a psychiatric evaluation to determine what appropriate medication she should be on and that she should take those medications. Miss Palma, you're someone who should be on medication. And medications are prescribed to you and I don't know but for what reason that you have and I know that people who take medication there are many reasons not to take them and you are one of those people who refuse to take their medication and, of course, the shortcoming is that you then try to excuse your behavior by the fact that you're not taking your medication. And obviously that didn't work with this Court this morning. And I'm strongly encouraging you to get on a medication program and take it because I feel confident it would
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Woodson v. State, 5D03-71.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 9, 2004
    ...affixed by a clerk or other court personnel, indicating that Woodson was "instructed" on these conditions. 3. See Palma v. State, 830 So.2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); O'Neal v. State, 801 So.2d 280 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Butler v. State, 775 So.2d 320 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Jones v. State, 744 So.......
  • Ewell v. State, 5D02-3067.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 22, 2003
    ...of probation or community control is substantial and willful before a court may revoke the defendant's probation. See Palma v. State, 830 So.2d 201, 202 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)(community control); King v. State, 817 So.2d 935, 937 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Nichols v. State, 747 So.2d 1015 (Fla. 1st ......
  • Copeland v. State, 1D02-419.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 14, 2004
    ...Williams had successfully completed more than two years of probation until the violation. Id. On the other hand, in Palma v. State, 830 So.2d 201, 203 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), the Fifth District held that despite Palma's bipolar disorder, her violation of probation was willful because she had m......
  • Crosby v. State, No. 4D02-4965
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 17, 2003
    ...Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee. WARNER, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Palma v. State, 830 So.2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). ...

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