Court Opinion

ID: 9375975
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-01 16:02:50.586206+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:03.667125
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                         Opinion filed March 1, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                             No. 3D20-1857
                        Lower Tribunal No. 19-0409
                           ________________

                             L.A., a juvenile,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                          The State of Florida,
                                  Appellee.

     An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Orlando A.
Prescott, Judge.

      Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and John Eddy Morrison,
Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

      Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Asad Ali and David Llanes,
Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ.

     LINDSEY, J.
     Appellant L.A., a juvenile, appeals from an order revoking his

probation. The sole basis for revoking probation was an adjudication of

delinquency for battery, which was separately appealed in L.A. v. State, 47

Fla. L. Weekly D2009 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 6, 2022) (case no. 3D20-1856). The

State agrees with Appellant that if the finding of delinquency for battery in

3D20-1856 were reversed, the probation order under review in this appeal

must also be reversed. See Stevens v. State, 409 So. 2d 1051, 1052 (Fla.

1982) (“[I]f a revocation is based solely on a conviction and that conviction

is subsequently reversed, the revocation must also be reversed.” (quoting

Stevens v. State, 397 So. 2d 398, 398 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981))).

     In 3D20-1856, this Court held that because the trial court did not make

case-specific findings of necessity for a remote adjudicatory hearing, the

delinquency adjudication for battery must be reversed. L.A., 47 Fla. L.

Weekly D2009. Because this Court has reversed the finding of delinquency

for battery in 3D20-1856, we likewise reverse the probation order under

review in this appeal and remand for a new probation violation hearing. See,

e.g., Humbert v. State, 933 So. 2d 726, 728 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“[T]he fact

that [defendant’s] conviction . . . was reversed does not mean that his

probation cannot be revoked based on the same facts.”).

     Reversed and remanded.

                                     2