You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Sweeney v. State

Citations: 580 So. 2d 337; 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5131; 1991 WL 92975Docket: No. 90-2432

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; June 5, 1991; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The trial court revoked the defendant’s community control due to failure to report to the Broward Probation and Restitution Center and for committing an assault. The appellate court affirms the revocation and the sentence but strikes the finding regarding the defendant's failure to report. The court determined that the trial court erred in modifying the community control without conducting a hearing, despite the defendant's written agreement to the modification. This follows the precedent set in Clark v. State, which emphasizes the necessity of notice and a hearing for such modifications. The appellate court finds sufficient evidence to affirm the assault charge, resulting in an affirmation of the revocation and sentence, but modified to exclude the reporting violation. The decision was concurred by Judges Letts, Gunther, and Garrett.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review of Sufficient Evidence

Application: The appellate court found sufficient evidence to support the assault charge, justifying the affirmation of the revocation and sentence.

Reasoning: The appellate court finds sufficient evidence to affirm the assault charge, resulting in an affirmation of the revocation and sentence, but modified to exclude the reporting violation.

Precedent for Notice and Hearing

Application: The decision follows the precedent established in Clark v. State, which mandates notice and a hearing for modifications to community control.

Reasoning: This follows the precedent set in Clark v. State, which emphasizes the necessity of notice and a hearing for such modifications.

Requirement of Hearing for Modification of Community Control

Application: The trial court's error in modifying the community control without a hearing is highlighted, even though the defendant agreed in writing to the modification.

Reasoning: The court determined that the trial court erred in modifying the community control without conducting a hearing, despite the defendant's written agreement to the modification.

Revocation of Community Control

Application: The appellate court affirms the trial court's decision to revoke the defendant's community control due to committing an assault.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirms the revocation and the sentence but strikes the finding regarding the defendant's failure to report.