Legal Opinion

Calhoun v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 4, 1989No. 89-22PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Calhoun appeals his probation order contending the trial court erred in failing to determine his ability to pay restitution, and in ordering an unspecified amount of restitution to be later determined by his probation officer. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

The state admits that the trial court erred in ordering Calhoun to pay an unspecified amount of restitution to be later determined by the probation officer. We agree and reverse that provision of the order of probation. Section 948.03(1)(e), Fla.Stat. (1987) provides that the amount of restitution is “to be determined by the court.”…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hamrick v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Dixon v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API