TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hamm v. State

Hamm v. State, 403 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 1, 1981
Docket
No. AF-118
Judges
Thompson
Citations
403 So. 2d 1155
Cited by 13 1 descriptions by later courts

Opinion

403 So.2d 1155 (1981)

James T. HAMM, Appellant,

v.

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. AF-118.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 1, 1981.

P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Gregory C. Smith, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

THOMPSON, Judge.

The appellant challenges the validity of his probation Orders, contending that the trial court improperly set forth the terms of the restitution that is to be made by the appellant. We agree and reverse.

The appellant was charged with stealing a shotgun and dealing in stolen property (i.e., another shotgun). At the time these crimes occurred, the victim's house was substantially *1156 damaged by shotgun blasts. The victim told an investigating officer that the appellant caused this damage. Additionally, the victim told the officer that before this shooting incident took place, certain jewelry had been stolen from her house, and she suspected that the appellant was responsible for this earlier incident.

The appellant pled guilty to the crimes charged, and a sentencing hearing was scheduled. At that hearing, the trial court placed the appellant on probation, with a condition that he provide full restitution to the victim, who was to furnish an estimate of her damages to the Probation and Parole Commission ("the Commission"). The appellant's counsel timely objected on several grounds to this condition being imposed. Counsel also requested a hearing on the issue of restitution. The objection was overruled and the request was denied. The Commission later determined that the amount of restitution should include sums for damages to the victim's house as well as for the stolen jewelry.

In Blincoe v. State, 371 So.2d 595 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), this court addressed a situation similar to the one at bar. In Blincoe , as a condition of probation, restitution was ordered when the appellant was sentenced, without any prior notice that restitution was to be considered. We stated that "notice of the proposed restitution must be provided a defendant and an opportunity afforded him to be heard on the amount of damage or loss." Id. at 596 . This procedure was not followed in this case, and reversal is required.

We also note that the trial court improperly requested the commission to determine the amount of restitution due. This determination must be made by the trial court. See McClure v. State, 371 So.2d 196, 197 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). Lastly, in determining the amount of restitution to be paid, the trial court may not "require payment in excess of the amount of damage the criminal conduct caused the victim." Fresneda v. State, 347 So.2d 1021, 1022 (Fla. 1977). The appellant was never charged with nor convicted of stealing the jewelry or causing the damage to the victim's house.

The Orders appealed from are reversed insofar as restitution was made a condition of probation. This cause is remanded with directions to provide the appellant with adequate notice of any proposed restitution, and to afford him an opportunity to be heard on the amount of damages. Such a hearing should be conducted in compliance with this opinion.

ERVIN and SHAW, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 13 cases

View all citing references →
1981: 11982: 31983: 11984: 11986: 31991: 11992: 11998: 12003: 119812026peak 1982 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Reynolds v. State598 So. 2d 188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
  2. Montalvo v. State705 So. 2d 984 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998) · Dissent
  3. Bradley v. State406 So. 2d 56 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
  4. Ballance v. State447 So. 2d 974 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
  5. Mansingh v. State588 So. 2d 636 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
  6. G. H. v. State414 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Most recent

  1. Bogert v. State834 So. 2d 392 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
  2. Montalvo v. State705 So. 2d 984 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998) · Dissent
  3. Reynolds v. State598 So. 2d 188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
  4. Mansingh v. State588 So. 2d 636 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
  5. James v. State499 So. 2d 24 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
  6. Masslieno v. State498 So. 2d 628 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Blincoe v. State, 371 So. 2d 595 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979) 2
Fresneda v. State, 347 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 1977) 94
McClure v. State, 371 So. 2d 196 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979) 13

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list