Legal Opinion

N.C. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 29, 2000No. 2D00-2010PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

N.C. challenges a restitution order. N.C. argues that the trial court erred in entering the order because he was not present at the restitution hearing and because the court failed to make a finding as to his present ability to pay. We agree and remand for another restitution hearing. On remand, the child must be present in person or by telephone, or the State must demonstrate that N.C. voluntarily waived his right to be present. See Fla. R.Juv.P. 8.100(a); J.D. v. State, 705 So.2d 44 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Moreover, the court shall make a finding as to N.C.’s (or his parents’) ability to make…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. C.D.D. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996
  2. J.D. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. M.W.G. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
  2. K.T.M. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
  3. KTM v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
  4. MWG v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
  5. NC v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API