Word v. State, 88-372

Decision Date08 November 1988
Docket NumberNo. 88-372,88-372
Citation533 So.2d 893,13 Fla. L. Weekly 2471
Parties13 Fla. L. Weekly 2471 Dale Douglas WORD, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and N. Joseph Durant, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Ivy R. Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before NESBITT, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.

BASKIN, Judge.

Appellant Word contests the trial court's order revoking probation. As one of the conditions of his probation, Word was ordered to make restitution to his victim. Word made only one payment to the victim, paying half the ordered amount. He failed to pay any other restitution, although each month he told his probation officer that he had income varying from $300 to $600. His probation officer testified that Word told her that he did not make restitution because the victim's insurance paid her bills.

The state filed an affidavit charging Word with violation of probation. The affidavit alleged that Word violated the terms of his probation by (1) changing residence without permission; (2) failing to make monthly reports; (3) failing to work diligently at a lawful occupation; (4) failing to report to his probation officer; and (5) failing to make restitution payments. At the revocation hearing, Word's probation officer was the only witness. She testified concerning Word's representations of his earnings and his stated reasons for failing to make restitution. The trial court announced that it was revoking Word's probation solely because of the failed restitution; however, the court's written order set forth all the grounds listed in the state's affidavit as the basis for revocation. Word contends that the trial court committed error by failing to require the state to show that Word was financially able to make restitution, and by issuing an order that did not conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

Word's assertion that the state had the burden of showing his ability to pay restitution is without merit. Once the state makes an initial showing that the probationer failed to make ordered restitution, the burden is on the defendant to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he does not have the ability to pay. Clark v. State, 510 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Morgan v. State, 491 So.2d 326 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Bass v. State, 473 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); §...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Green v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 2, 1993
    ...326, 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Guardado v. State, 562 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So.2d 287 (Fla.1990); Word v. State, 533 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Any probation violation sufficient to trigger revocation "must be substantial and the willful and substantial nature of the......
  • Blackwelder v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 1, 2005
    ...burden shifts to the probationer to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he lacked the ability to pay. See also Word v. State, 533 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). However, section 948.06(5), despite its plain language, cannot relieve the State of its burden to prove that the violation ......
  • McQuitter v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 10, 1993
    ...(1989); Morgan v. State, 491 So.2d 326 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Bass v. State, 473 So.2d 1367, 1370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Word v. State, 533 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Since inability to pay is a defense which the probationer must prove, if the probationer offers no evidence on the issue, the......
  • Crawford v. State, 3D00-3349.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 9, 2001
    ...defendant did not have the ability to pay the court costs and restitution amount. See § 948.06(5), Fla. Stat. (2000); Word v. State, 533 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We therefore strike those findings of the trial Given the trial court's remarks at sentencing, it is quite clear that striki......

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