Mansell v. State, 498 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Mansell v. State, 498 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 2011 · …the amount of restitution is a determination to be made exclusively by the trial court and cannot be delegated. at p. 604 ✓
15 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: D.W. v. State (fladistctapp, 2011-12-28)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) D.W. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the amount of restitution is a determination to be made exclusively by the trial court and cannot be delegated.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) DW v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the amount of restitution is a determination to be made exclusively by the trial court and cannot be delegated.
discussed Cited "see" Caso v. DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERVS.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See In Interest of J.J.C., 498 So.2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (court recognized the concept of prospective neglect as a basis to terminate parental rights where a mother was found to be a chronic schizophrenic and her condition was basically untreatable rendering her incapable of effectively rearing a child).
cited Cited "see" Fazio v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mansell v. State, 498 So.2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Buchanan v. State, 483 So.2d 537 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mitchell M. MANSELL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
86-1110.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Dec 3, 1986.
498 So. 2d 604
Scheb.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published
1 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: #40,117 of 633,719
Citer courts: District Court of Appeal of Fl… (2)

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and John T. Kilcrease, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Theda R. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

SCHEB, Acting Chief Judge.

Defendant Mitchell M. Mansell was convicted of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft. In addition to sentencing the defendant to three years' imprisonment, the court ordered him to make restitution.

The court based the restitution amount on a presentence investigation report prepared by the Florida Parole and Probation Commission. The defendant objected to the amount and a hearing was held in which the trial judge awarded the amount of $2,871.40 as recommended by the presentence investigation report. We agree with the defendant that the court erred.

The amount of restitution is a determination to be made exclusively by the trial court and cannot be delegated. McClure v. State, 371 So.2d 196 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). By relying solely on the presentence investigation report, the trial court improperly delegated its exclusive responsibility. McClure.

Accordingly, we vacate the restitution order and remand for the imposition of restitution to be determined by the trial court. On remand, the state will have the burden of demonstrating the amount of loss sustained by the victim as a result of the offense in accordance with section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1985).

RYDER and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.