Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2001

Cherisma v. State

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided August 1, 2001 · Gross, Polen, Stone

789 So. 2d 1247; 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10844; 2001 WL 864270 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Grant v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)
Nugent v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order revoking appellant’s probation. The evidence presented at the hearing supports the finding that appellant violated his probation by setting up the armed robbery of his employer. The trial court erred in finding appellant guilty of Count II of the amended violation probation affidavit, since no evidence was presented concerning that armed robbery. Nonetheless, the other armed robbery violation is more than substantial enough to warrant revocation, so we do not remand the case for reconsideration by the trial court. See Kiess v. State, 642 So.2d 1141, 1142 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).

POLEN, C.J., STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.