Case Name: Arthur KRUG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1997-02-26
Citations: 689 So. 2d 391
Docket Number: No. 96-1780
Parties: Arthur KRUG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GODERICH and SORONDO, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 689
Pages: 391–392

Head Matter:
Arthur KRUG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 96-1780.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 26, 1997.
John A. Jabro, Tavernier, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Mark Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GODERICH and SORONDO, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
On August 11, 1992 the Appellant was sentenced to two years of community control to be followed by a term of probation of fifteen years. On May 28,1996 the appellant noticed a motion for early termination of probation. At the hearing, evidence was introduced to establish that the appellant had been a model probationer and that he deserved to have his probation terminated. After conducting a thorough evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that under the provisions of Section 948.04, Florida Statutes, it did not have jurisdiction to terminate a probationary period imposed for a violation of Florida Statute, Chapter 794. The appel-lee properly concedes that this was error. Arriaga v. State, 666 So.2d 949 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Jones v. State, 666 So.2d 191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Baker v. State, 619 So.2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
We decline the appellant's invitation to terminate his probation and remand to the trial court for a ruling on the merits of the motion in question.
Reversed.