Stevens v. State, No. 2D01-3905.
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Writing for the Court | DAVIS. |
| Citation | 823 So.2d 319 |
| Decision Date | 16 August 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D01-3905. |
| Parties | Lisa Debra STEVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
823 So.2d 319
Lisa Debra STEVENS, Appellant,v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee
No. 2D01-3905.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
August 16, 2002.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Katherine Coombs
DAVIS, Judge.
Lisa Stevens challenges the circuit court order revoking her probation and sentencing her to two years' community control. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further consideration.
On June 13, 2000, Stevens pleaded no contest to grand theft and was sentenced to eighteen months' probation. The order of probation included as conditions of the probation the performance of one hundred hours of public service work in equal monthly installments and the payment of court costs and investigative costs in equal monthly installments. At her initial meeting, the probation officer instructed Stevens that the work hours should be completed at the water treatment plant on Sheldon Road in Tampa. Additionally, the officer instructed Stevens that she should make monthly payments of $81.70 per month to complete her financial obligation.
On February 23, 2001, an affidavit of violation was filed, alleging that Stevens had violated her probation by (1) falsifying the number of community service hours she had performed, (2) failing to complete the necessary number of community service hours in equal monthly installments, and (3) failing to pay costs in equal monthly installments. At the revocation hearing held on July 25, 2001, the trial court found that Stevens had committed all three violations. We affirm that finding only as it applies to Stevens' failure to perform the required community service hours in equal monthly installments.
For a trial court to revoke probation based on a violation of a condition of probation, the violation must be willful and substantial. Hightower v. State, 529 So.2d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). At a revocation hearing, the State has the burden of establishing the violation by a preponderance of the evidence. Roseboro v. State, 528 So.2d 499 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Van Wagner v. State, 677 So.2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). The standard of review to be followed by this court in reviewing an order revoking probation is abuse of discretion. Bennett v. State, 684 So.2d 242 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the greater weight of the evidence here does not support the trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
T.M.H. v. D.M.T., No. 5D09–3559.
...held that “ ‘agreements granting visitation rights to a non-parent are unenforceable.’ ” Wakeman, 921 So.2d at 673 (quoting Lamaritata, 823 So.2d at 319); Taylor, 649 So.2d at 271–72 (“Florida courts do not recognize a claim for specific performance of a contract for visitation in favor of ......
-
D.M.T. v. T.M.H., No. SC12–261.
...were a “commissioning couple” who intended to jointly parent the child conceived through assisted reproductive technology); Lamaritata, 823 So.2d at 319 (rejecting a sperm donor's claim to parental rights because the mother and father “did not commission or contract to jointly raise the chi......
-
T.M.H. v. D.M.T., Case No. 5D09-3559
...held that "'agreements granting visitation rights to a non-parent are unenforceable.'" Wakeman, 921 So. 2d at 673 (quoting Lamaritata, 823 So. 2d at 319); Taylor, 649 So. 2d at 271-72 ("Florida courts do not recognize a claim for specific performance of a contract for visitation in favor of......
-
Savage v. State, No. 2D12–2269.
...DCA 1982)); Hanania v. State, 855 So.2d 92, 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (using term “preponderance” of the evidence) (citing Stevens v. State, 823 So.2d 319, 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)); Hightower v. State, 529 So.2d 726, 727 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (citing Molina v. State, 520 So.2d 320 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988......
-
T.M.H. v. D.M.T., No. 5D09–3559.
...held that “ ‘agreements granting visitation rights to a non-parent are unenforceable.’ ” Wakeman, 921 So.2d at 673 (quoting Lamaritata, 823 So.2d at 319); Taylor, 649 So.2d at 271–72 (“Florida courts do not recognize a claim for specific performance of a contract for visitation in favor of ......
-
D.M.T. v. T.M.H., No. SC12–261.
...were a “commissioning couple” who intended to jointly parent the child conceived through assisted reproductive technology); Lamaritata, 823 So.2d at 319 (rejecting a sperm donor's claim to parental rights because the mother and father “did not commission or contract to jointly raise the chi......
-
T.M.H. v. D.M.T., Case No. 5D09-3559
...held that "'agreements granting visitation rights to a non-parent are unenforceable.'" Wakeman, 921 So. 2d at 673 (quoting Lamaritata, 823 So. 2d at 319); Taylor, 649 So. 2d at 271-72 ("Florida courts do not recognize a claim for specific performance of a contract for visitation in favor of......
-
Savage v. State, No. 2D12–2269.
...DCA 1982)); Hanania v. State, 855 So.2d 92, 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (using term “preponderance” of the evidence) (citing Stevens v. State, 823 So.2d 319, 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)); Hightower v. State, 529 So.2d 726, 727 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (citing Molina v. State, 520 So.2d 320 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988......