Case Name: Joseph HAMMOND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-09-04
Citations: 679 So. 2d 347
Docket Number: No. 95-3465
Parties: Joseph HAMMOND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GLICKSTEIN, FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 679
Pages: 347–348

Head Matter:
Joseph HAMMOND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 95-3465.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Sept. 4, 1996.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Karen E. Ehrlich, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee; and Carol Coboum Asbury, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was on felony probation. He pled guilty to violating his probation in two ways — not filing his monthly reports for three months and failing to pay the costs of supervision. Contrary to Allen v. State, 662 So.2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the trial court made no finding of appellant's financial ability to pay the costs of supervision, and was therefore prohibited from violating appellant's probation on this ground. We cannot tell from this record whether the trial court would have imposed the same sentence had the violation regarding monthly reports been considered alone. See Jess v. State, 384 So.2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). On remand, the trial court may reconsider the sentence in light of the one violation and, if necessary, hold a hearing addressing the Allen issue.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
GLICKSTEIN, FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.