678 SO2D 432 - Ford v. State

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2014

8 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and David McPherrin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Joan Fowler, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4The appellant's probation was revoked based solely upon hearsay, which included the testimony of a police officer concerning a witness's identification of appellant as the perpetrator of the crime of exposure of sexual organs. This constituted hearsay because the witness did not testify at the revocation hearing. § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995); Harrell v. State,647 So.2d 1016, 1017-18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). "While hearsay evidence is admissible in probation revocation proceedings, hearsay alone is insufficient to establish a violation of a condition of probation." Kiess v. State,642 So.2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion in revoking appellant's probation. We reverse and remand for a new hearing on appellant's alleged violation. See Arnold v. State,497 So.2d 1356 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Purvis v. State,420 So.2d 389 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Robbins v. State,318 So.2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).

¶5Reversed and remanded.

¶6DELL, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.