Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

747 So. 2d 1005

Cyr v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 8, 1999

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1999-12-08

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 2000

1 state decisions

Relies on 643 So. 2d 674 - Bell v. State · 686 So. 2d 697 - Larangera v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1999-12-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NORTHCUTT, Judge,

¶1The circuit court revoked Michael Cyr’s probation for failing to comply with the condition that he “shall continue sex offender counseling.” Cyr had attended counseling sessions for five years, although the evidence showed his attendance was sporadic. The leader of the program, a mental health therapist, finally terminated him for a number of reasons. In finding a violation, the circuit court observed that Cyr “was to enter and successfully complete sex offender counseling, [and] that counseling, in fact, was not completed.” But Cyr’s probation condition did not direct him to complete counseling, nor did it *1006require him to remain in a counseling program for a specified period. Probation may not be revoked based on a condition such as Cyr’s when the probationer has actually attended some counseling sessions, but has either quit or been involuntarily terminated. See Larangera v. State, 686 So.2d 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Bell v. State, 643 So.2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Accordingly, we reverse the revocation of probation.

¶2Reversed.

PATTERSON, C.J., and STRINGER, J., Concur.
/747/so2d/1005 · .json · Public domain