00-3519 ROBERTSON V. STATE

State: Florida

Court: Florida Third District Court

Docket No: 00-3519 ROBERTSON V. STATE

Case Date: 11/21/2001

Preview:NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2001

CHARLES ROBERTSON, Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

** ** ** ** ** CASE NO. 3D00-3519

LOWER TRIBUNAL NO.

98-29479

Opinion filed November 21, 2001. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ronald C. Dresnick, Judge. Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. and Lisa Walsh,

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Keaton, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before JORGENSON, SORONDO, and RAMIREZ, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

Kristine

The appellant, Charles Robertson, was placed on He was accused of committing an

probation on December 9, 1998.

attempted burglary later that same day.

We reject his challenge

to the sufficiency of the evidence submitted at the hearing to revoke his probation. conviction is not "Proof sufficient to allow a criminal required to support a trial judge's

discretionary order revoking probation; the state need only show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant committed the offense charged." (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). We also reject the appellant's complaint that the trial court relied on hearsay evidence. Hearsay evidence is Amador v. State, 713 So. 2d 1121, 1122

admissible in violation of probation hearings and can sustain a violation when corroborated by direct evidence. State, 727 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). See Morris v. Here, the

prosecution presented the hearsay statements of the confidential informant which were corroborated by the direct observations of the police officers surveilling the scene of the attempted burglary. Thus, the evidence was sufficient to uphold the

revocation of probation.

2

Download 00-3519 ROBERTSON V. STATE.pdf