Case ID: so2d_697/html/0572-01.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

Michael ERCEG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 96-3470.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    July 31, 1997.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Louis G. Carres, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Diana K. Bock, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

The trial court found that the appellant had violated his probation by loitering and prowling contrary to the condition of his probation that he not violate any law. The state concedes that the record does not support a finding of guilt as to the charge of loitering and prowling, because the offense did not occur in the presence of a police officer. Freeman v. State, 617 So.2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). We therefore reverse and remand for the reinstatement of appellant’s probation.

STONE, C.J., and WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.