WILLIAMS v. STATE (2025)

Appellant Marvin Williams appeals his sentence imposed after a violation of probation, alleging that the trial court failed to conduct a presentence investigation (PSI) before sentencing him as a habitual violent felony offender (HVFO). Because Williams's original sentence was imposed pursuant to a negotiated plea in which he agreed to be sentenced as an HVFO without a PSI, he could not have challenged his original sentence based on the lack of a PSI, and accordingly cannot challenge his violation of probation sentence on that basis. See Hatcher v. State, No. 3D23-1252, ––– So. 3d ––––, 2025 WL 610028 (Fla. 3d DCA Feb. 26, 2025).

However, the trial court erred in failing to reduce its oral findings and sentence at the violation of probation hearing to writing. In a probation revocation hearing, due process requires “a written statement by the factfinder as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revoking probation.” McCloud v. State, 653 So. 2d 453, 455 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (quoting Black v. Romano, 471 U.S. 606, 612, 105 S.Ct. 2254, 85 L.Ed.2d 636 (1985)).

Affirmed in part; remanded with instructions to enter a written probation revocation order.

PER CURIAM.