State v. Hall

Supreme Court of Florida
State v. Hall, 668 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 1996)
21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 77; 1996 Fla. LEXIS 147; 1996 WL 75331
Anstead, Grimes, Harding, Kogan, Overton, Shaw, Wells

State v. Hall

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We have for review a decision of the Second District Court of Appeal passing upon the following question certified to be of great public importance:

DOES THE SUPREME COURT’S PROMULGATION OP THE FORM “ORDER OF PROBATION” IN FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.986 CONSTITUTE SUFFICIENT NOTICE TO PROBATIONERS OF CONDITIONS 1-11 SUCH THAT ORAL PRONOUNCEMENT OF THESE CONDITIONS BY THE TRIAL COURT IS UNNECESSARY?

See Hall v. State, 652 So.2d 1197, 1197-98 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. Since we have already answered the identical question in the affirmative in State v. Hart, 668 So.2d 589 (Fla. 1996), we quash the district court decision and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with Hart.

It is so ordered.

GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Reference

Full Case Name
STATE of Florida v. James L. HALL
Status
Published