82 So. 3d 993
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Carter appeals a probation-revocation order for alleged cocaine use/possession while on probation.
- Issue on appeal: whether competent evidence at the revocation hearing proved the cocaine use/possession.
- Appellate standard: abuse of discretion; court reviews sufficiency of evidence at the revocation hearing.
- Hearsay is admissible to supplement, but cannot support revocation on its own; lab results are admissible for limited purposes.
- Testimony in the case rested on hearsay lab results and a field test, which lacked reliable foundation, making the evidence insufficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the evidence sufficient to revoke probation? | Carter | State | No; evidence insufficient to prove willful cocaine use/possession. |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. State, 962 So.2d 394 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (hearsay admissible to supplement, not to sustain revocation)
- Crume v. State, 703 So.2d 1216 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (hearsay cannot be sole basis for revocation)
- Andrews v. State, 693 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (hearsay admissible but not sole basis for revocation)
- Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reliability and foundation required for field tests identifying contraband)
- Bray v. State, 75 So.3d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (similar reversal where field test reliability and foundation were lacking)
- Terry v. State, 111 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (presence of cocaine metabolites adequate where officer certified and test explained)
- Robinson v. State, 982 So.2d 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (scientific testing predicates must be satisfied for admissibility)
- Van Wagner v. State, 677 So.2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (burden to prove violation by preponderance of the evidence)