Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

710 So. 2d 979

710 So.2d 979

23 Fla.L.WeeklySupp. 295

State v. Huff

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 4, 1998

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1998-06-04

Relies on Huff v. State

Decided 1998-06-04

WELLS, Justice.

¶1We have for review the following question certified to be of great public importance:

SHOULD THE REQUIREMENT THAT A DEFENDANT PAY FOR DRUG TESTING BE TREATED AS A GENERAL CONDITION OF PROBATION FOR WHICH NOTICE IS PROVIDED BY SECTION 948.09(6), FLORIDA STATUTES (1995), OR SHOULD IT BE TREATED AS A SPECIAL CONDITION THAT REQUIRES ORAL ANNOUNCEMENT?

¶2Huff v. State, 700 So.2d 787, 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We answered this question in State v. Williams, No. 91,655, — So.2d - (Fla. June 4, 1998), by holding that the requirement that a defendant pay for drug testing is a special condition of probation which the trial court must pronounce orally at sentencing. Accordingly, we approve the decision below.

¶3It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
/710/so2d/979 · .json · Public domain