Carty v. State, 79 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). · Go Syfert
Search
Carty v. State, 79 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases · …if a person is found guilty of ... a crime of domestic violence, as defined in s. 741.28, ... the court shall order that the defendant attend and complete a batterers' intervention program as a condition of probation. at p. 240 ⚠ not in text
4 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) LUDWINE FRANCOIS v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
See § 741.281, Fla. Stat. (2019) (“If a person is found guilty of … a crime of domestic violence, as defined in s. 741.28, … the court shall order that the defendant attend and complete a batterers’ intervention program as a condition of probation.”) (emphasis added); § 741.28(2), Fla. Stat. (2019) (“‘Domestic violence’ means … any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death of one family or household member by another family or household member.”) (emphasis added); Carty v. State, 79 So. 3d 239, 240 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (“Here, the batterer’s intervention p…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) LUDWINE FRANCOIS v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
See § 741.281, Fla. Stat. (2019) (“If a person is found guilty of … a crime of domestic violence, as defined in s. 741.28, … the court shall order that the defendant attend and complete a batterers’ intervention program as a condition of probation.”) (emphasis added); § 741.28(2), Fla. Stat. (2019) (“‘Domestic violence’ means … any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death of one family or household member by another family or household member.”) (emphasis added); Carty v. State, 79 So. 3d 239, 240 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (“Here, the batterer’s intervention p…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Louis v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
A sentencing court has broad discretion in imposing a special condition to probation, but the condition “must be reasonably related, to rehabilitation.” Carty v. State, 79 So.3d 239, 240 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); see also Williams v. State, 182 So.3d 912, 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016).
discussed Cited "see" Williams v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Carty v. State, 79 So.3d 239, 240 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (“The trial court has broad discretion in imposing conditions of probation, but to be valid, the condition must be ‘reasonably related to rehabilitation.’ ” (quoting Stephens v. State, 659 So.2d 1303, 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995))); Williams v. State, 474 So.2d 1260, 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (“A special condition of probation cannot be imposed if it is so punitive as to be unrelated to rehabilitation.” (citing Kominshy v. State, 330 So.2d 800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976))).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rennie CARTY, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee
1D11-3512.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Feb 17, 2012.
79 So. 3d 239
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Diana L. Johnson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant., Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Angela R. Hensel and Donna A. Gerace, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Benton, Wetherell, Ray.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of resisting an officer without violence. He was sentenced to probation which included a special condition requiring him to complete a batterer’s intervention program. Appellant contends that this condition is invalid because it is not reasonably related to his rehabilitation. We agree and reverse.

Appellant was originally charged with battery, burglary of a conveyance with assault, and resisting an officer without violence. The jury acquitted him of the battery and burglary charges, but returned a guilty verdict on the resisting charge. Nonetheless, the trial court included the batterer’s intervention program as a special condition of Appellant’s probation.

The trial court has broad discretion in imposing conditions of probation, but to be valid, the condition must be “reasonably related to rehabilitation.” Stephens v. State, 659 So.2d 1303, 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). “In determining whether a condition of probation is reasonably related to rehabilitation, ... a condition is invalid if it (1) has no relationship to the crime of which the offender was convicted, (2) relates to conduct which is not in itself criminal, and (3) requires or forbids conduct which is not reasonably related to future criminality.” Biller v. State, 618 So.2d 734, 734-35 (Fla.1993) (quoting Rodriguez v. State, 378 So.2d 7, 9 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)).

Here, the batterer’s intervention program has no relationship to Appellant’s conviction for resisting an officer without violence, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that Appellant has a propensity towards domestic violence. The fact that Appellant was also charged with battery and burglary of a conveyance with assault does not justify the condition requiring Appellant to complete a batterer’s intervention program because the jury acquitted Appellant of those charges. Accordingly, the condition is invalid.

For these reasons, we reverse the portion of Appellant’s sentence requiring him to complete a batterer’s intervention program and remand for the trial court to strike that condition of probation.

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

BENTON, C.J., WETHERELL, and RAY, JJ., concur.