Deangelus v. State, 614 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). · Go Syfert
Deangelus v. State, 614 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Crosby v. State (fladistctapp, 1994-05-27)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Crosby v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See Deangelus v. State, 614 So.2d 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lisa Marie DEANGELUS
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 91-02947.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Feb 26, 1993.
614 So. 2d 1194
1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2242
1993 WL 48236
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Julius Aulisio, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant., Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Peggy A. Quince, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Campbell, Hall, Schoonover.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the trial court’s order imposing restitution in the amount of $95,172.23. We affirm the order imposing restitution but reverse the amount.

[*1195] After a jury trial, the appellant was convicted of driving under the influence. Appellant challenges both the imposition of restitution and the amount. We find no merit to her contention that restitution was improperly imposed and we affirm that portion of the sentence imposing restitution. However, because the appellant met her burden and established by the preponderance of the evidence her inability to pay the amount of $95,172.23 we reverse the amount of restitution. The appellant demonstrated that she has no present nor potential future financial resources to pay the $95,172.23 in restitution ordered by the trial court. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1989); Boss v. State, 613 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Bautista v. State, 600 So.2d 1255 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Medina v. State, 591 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).

We strike the amount of restitution and remand for the trial court to determine a reasonable amount of restitution within the appellant’s ability to pay.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and HALL, JJ., concur.