Case ID: so2d_375/html/0867-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eddie L. WILLIAMS a/k/a Freddie Williams, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Nos. 78-2228, 78-2229 and 78-2305.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Oct. 10, 1979.
    Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, Bar-tow, and Karal B. Rushing, Asst. Public Defender, and Daniel L. Perry, Legal Intern, Tampa, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Michael A. Palecki, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant attacks the orders revoking his probation in three cases. The revocations were based on a substantial ground for which there is adequate support in the record. However, the orders also specify appellant’s failure to live and remain at liberty without violating any law as an additional ground for revocation. This was improper because there was no evidence presented from which the court could find that appellant had violated any law. Coxon v. State, 365 So.2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).

Accordingly, we strike the latter ground from the three orders of revocation. In all other respects, the orders of revocation, together with the judgments and sentences, are affirmed.

GRIMES, C. J., OTT, J., and STRICKLAND, J. TIM, Associate Judge, concur.