RAMOS HADDOCK v. STATE (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Wilfredo RAMOS-HADDOCK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case Nos. 2D18-367

Decided: November 06, 2019

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Maureen E. Surber, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Elba Caridad Martin, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

Wilfredo Ramos-Haddock challenges an order revoking his probation in case numbers 2012-CF-3806 and 2012-CF-10891 after he admitted violating his probation. We affirm the revocation of probation and the sentences without comment.

The State correctly concedes, however, that the trial court erred in entering a written order of revocation of probation that did not specify the condition(s) that Ramos-Haddock violated. See Underwood v. State, 98 So. 3d 745, 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (and cases cited therein). In addition, the amended judgment and sentence in case number 2012-CF-3806 erroneously indicate that he admitted that he had violated condition 5 of his probation. Accordingly, we reverse the order revoking probation in both cases and remand for the trial court to enter a written order of revocation that specifies the condition(s) violated. On remand, the trial court shall also strike the statement in the amended judgment and sentence in case number 2012-CF-3806 that Ramos-Haddock admitted that he had violated condition 5 of his probation.

Affirmed and remanded with directions.

PER CURIAM.

NORTHCUTT, MORRIS, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network