Hollister v. State

The appellant, Joseph Matthew Hollister, challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence of contraband found in his possession. We, however, find no error with respect to the denial of Hollister’s motion and affirm.

Hollister also challenges the imposition of certain probationary conditions and court costs. In that regard, we conclude that the trial court improperly imposed a condition of probation which prohibits Hollister from using intoxicants to excess, without orally pronouncing that condition at sentencing. See Malone v. State, 652 So.2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We therefore…