RODRIGUEZ v. STATE (2020)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jose RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D20-0460

Decided: September 30, 2020

Before EMAS, C.J., and SCALES, and MILLER, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Manuel Alvarez, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kseniya Smychkouskaya, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Appellant, Jose Rodriguez, challenges an order revoking his probation and imposing a new term of supervision for his felony offenses. Cognizant that the lower tribunal “is in the best position to evaluate the credibility of witnesses and on appeal we are obligated to give great deference to the findings of the trial court,” Riggins v. State, 830 So. 2d 920, 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (citations omitted), and violation of a no contact order is sufficient, in certain circumstances, to demonstrate a “willful, material, and substantial violation” of probationary conditions, here, we discern no abuse of discretion and affirm. Davis v. State, 796 So. 2d 1222, 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); see Glee v. State, 731 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

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Out of date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