History
  • No items yet
midpage
Erceg v. State
697 So. 2d 572
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1997
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

The trial court found that the appellant had violated his probation by loitering and prowling contrary to the condition of his probation that he not violate any law. The state concedes that the record does not support a finding of guilt as to the charge of loitering and prowling, because the offense did not occur in the presence of a police officer. Freeman v. State, 617 So.2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). We therefore reverse and remand for the reinstatement of appellant’s probation.

STONE, C.J., and WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Erceg v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jul 31, 1997
Citation: 697 So. 2d 572
Docket Number: No. 96-3470
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.