Case Name: Steven Earl HUTCHINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2003-10-22
Citations: 856 So. 2d 1108
Docket Number: No. 1D02-896
Parties: Steven Earl HUTCHINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: ERVIN, ALLEN and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 856
Pages: 1108–1109

Head Matter:
Steven Earl HUTCHINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 1D02-896.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Oct. 22, 2003.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Nancy L. Showalter, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Thomas H. Duffy, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges the revocation of his probation, where the court did not indicate which particular conditions were violated. Because this is required under cases such as Rogers v. State, 635 So.2d 1026 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), the appealed orders are reversed and the case is remanded for entry of a written order specifying the conditions which the court found to have been violated. See also, e.g., Jones v. State, 638 So.2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Brundage v. State, 598 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
ERVIN, ALLEN and LEWIS, JJ., concur.