Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

937 So. 2d 1266

Docket No. 2D05-2666.

Massaline v. State

Learia Chad MASSALINE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 29, 2006.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2006-09-29

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 2007

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-09-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1267 James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Richard P. Albertine, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

¶2Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah Hogge, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

¶3WHATLEY, Judge.

¶4Learia Chad Massaline appeals the amended order revoking his probation. We affirm but remand for the trial court to strike two findings.

¶5The trial court found that Massaline violated conditions five, seven, twenty-seven, and twenty-eight of his probation. The greater weight of the evidence supports the finding that Massaline violated conditions five and seven. The State concedes that the trial court erred in finding that Massaline violated conditions twenty-seven and twenty-eight because the State failed to present evidence of his ability to pay the costs of supervision and court costs. Accordingly, these violations must be stricken.

¶6The record is clear that the trial court would have revoked Massaline's probation based on the violation of conditions five and seven alone. Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Massaline's probation but remand for the trial court to strike the findings that Massaline violated conditions twenty-seven and twenty-eight.

¶7Affirmed; remanded with directions.

¶8CASANUEVA and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.

/937/so2d/1266 · .json · Public domain