Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 948.01 (2025)

When court may place defendant on probation or into community control.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

948.01 When court may place defendant on probation or into community control.—

(1) Any state court having original jurisdiction of criminal actions may at a time to be determined by the court, with or without an adjudication of the guilt of the defendant, hear and determine the question of the probation of a defendant in a criminal case, except for an offense punishable by death, who has been found guilty by the verdict of a jury, has entered a plea of guilty or a plea of nolo contendere, or has been found guilty by the court trying the case without a jury.

(a) If the court places the defendant on probation or into community control for a felony, the department shall provide immediate supervision by an officer employed in compliance with the minimum qualifications for officers as provided in s. 943.13. The department may provide supervision to misdemeanor offenders sentenced or placed on probation by a circuit court when so ordered by the sentencing court. A private entity may not provide probationary or supervision services to felony offenders sentenced or placed on probation or other supervision.

(b) The department, in consultation with the Office of the State Courts Administrator, shall revise and make available to the courts uniform order of supervision forms by July 1 of each year or as necessary. The courts shall use the uniform order of supervision forms provided by the department for all persons placed on community supervision.

(2) If it appears to the court upon a hearing of the matter that the defendant is not likely again to engage in a criminal course of conduct and that the ends of justice and the welfare of society do not require that the defendant presently suffer the penalty imposed by law, the court, in its discretion, may either adjudge the defendant to be guilty or stay and withhold the adjudication of guilt. In either case, the court shall stay and withhold the imposition of sentence upon the defendant and shall place a felony defendant upon probation. If the defendant is found guilty of a nonfelony offense as the result of a trial or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld, the court may place the defendant on probation. In addition to court costs and fees and notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the court may impose a fine authorized by law if the offender is a nonfelony offender who is not placed on probation. However, a defendant who is placed on probation for a misdemeanor may not be placed under the supervision of the department unless the circuit court was the court of original jurisdiction.

(3) If, after considering the provisions of subsection (2) and the offender’s prior record or the seriousness of the offense, it appears to the court in the case of a felony disposition that probation is an unsuitable dispositional alternative to imprisonment, the court may place the offender in a community control program as provided in s. 948.10. Or, in a case of prior disposition of a felony commitment, upon motion of the offender or the department or upon its own motion, the court may, within the period of its retained jurisdiction following commitment, suspend the further execution of the disposition and place the offender in a community control program upon such terms as the court may require. The court may consult with a local offender advisory council pursuant to s. 948.90 with respect to the placement of an offender into community control. Not later than 3 working days before the hearing on the motion, the department shall forward to the court all relevant material on the offender’s progress while in custody. If this sentencing alternative to incarceration is utilized, the court shall:

(a) Determine what community-based sanctions will be imposed in the community control plan. Community-based sanctions may include, but are not limited to, rehabilitative restitution in money or in kind, curfew, revocation or suspension of the driver license, community service, deprivation of nonessential activities or privileges, or other appropriate restraints on the offender’s liberty.

(b) After appropriate sanctions for the offense are determined, develop, approve, and order a plan of community control which contains rules, requirements, conditions, and programs that are designed to encourage noncriminal functional behavior and promote the rehabilitation of the offender and the protection of the community. If the offense was a controlled substance violation, the conditions shall include a requirement that the offender submit to random substance abuse testing intermittently throughout the term of supervision, upon the direction of the correctional probation officer as defined in s. 943.10(3).

(4) The sanctions imposed by order of the court shall be commensurate with the seriousness of the offense. When community control or a program of public service is ordered by the court, the duration of community control supervision or public service may not be longer than the sentence that could have been imposed if the offender had been committed for the offense or a period not to exceed 2 years, whichever is less. When restitution or public service is ordered by the court, the amount of restitution or public service may not be greater than an amount which the offender could reasonably be expected to pay or perform.

(5) The imposition of sentence may not be suspended and the defendant thereupon placed on probation or into community control unless the defendant is placed under the custody of the department or another public or private entity. A private entity may not provide probationary or supervision services to felony offenders sentenced or placed on probation or other supervision.

(6) When the court, under any of the foregoing subsections, places a defendant on probation or into community control, it may specify that the defendant serve all or part of the probationary or community control period in a community residential or nonresidential facility under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections or the Department of Children and Families or any public or private entity providing such services, and it shall require the payment prescribed in s. 948.09.

(7)(a) Notwithstanding s. 921.0024 and effective for offenses committed on or after July 1, 2009, the sentencing court may place the defendant into a postadjudicatory treatment-based drug court program if the defendant’s Criminal Punishment Code scoresheet total sentence points under s. 921.0024 are 60 points or fewer, the offense is a nonviolent felony, the defendant is amenable to substance abuse treatment, and the defendant otherwise qualifies under s. 397.334(3). The satisfactory completion of the program shall be a condition of the defendant’s probation or community control. As used in this subsection, the term “nonviolent felony” means a third degree felony violation under chapter 810 or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in s. 776.08.

(b) The defendant must be fully advised of the purpose of the program, and the defendant must agree to enter the program. The original sentencing court shall relinquish jurisdiction of the defendant’s case to the postadjudicatory drug court program until the defendant is no longer active in the program, the case is returned to the sentencing court due to the defendant’s termination from the program for failure to comply with the terms thereof, or the defendant’s sentence is completed.

(8)(a) Notwithstanding s. 921.0024 and effective for offenses committed on or after July 1, 2016, the sentencing court may place the defendant into a postadjudicatory mental health court program if the offense is a nonviolent felony, the defendant is amenable to mental health treatment, including taking prescribed medications, and the defendant is otherwise qualified under s. 394.47892(4). The satisfactory completion of the program must be a condition of the defendant’s probation or community control. As used in this subsection, the term “nonviolent felony” means a third degree felony violation under chapter 810 or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in s. 776.08. Defendants charged with resisting an officer with violence under s. 843.01, battery on a law enforcement officer under s. 784.07, or aggravated assault may participate in the mental health court program if the court so orders after the victim is given his or her right to provide testimony or written statement to the court as provided in s. 921.143.

(b) The defendant must be fully advised of the purpose of the mental health court program, and the defendant must agree to enter the program. The original sentencing court shall relinquish jurisdiction of the defendant’s case to the postadjudicatory mental health court program until the defendant is no longer active in the program, the case is returned to the sentencing court due to the defendant’s termination from the program for failure to comply with the terms thereof, or the defendant’s sentence is completed.

(c) The Department of Corrections may establish designated and trained mental health probation officers to support individuals under supervision of the mental health court program.

History.—s. 20, ch. 20519, 1941; s. 7, ch. 22858, 1945; s. 1, ch. 59-130; s. 1, ch. 61-498; s. 1, ch. 65-453; s. 1, ch. 67-204; ss. 12, 13, ch. 74-112; s. 3, ch. 75-301; s. 3, ch. 76-238; s. 90, ch. 77-120; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 109, ch. 79-3; s. 13, ch. 83-131; s. 14, ch. 85-288; s. 1, ch. 86-106; s. 4, ch. 87-211; s. 69, ch. 88-122; s. 36, ch. 89-526; ss. 7, 16, ch. 90-337; ss. 2, 14, ch. 91-225; ss. 1, 15, ch. 91-280; s. 14, ch. 93-227; s. 17, ch. 96-322; s. 21, ch. 97-78; s. 1876, ch. 97-102; s. 6, ch. 97-239; s. 13, ch. 98-81; s. 121, ch. 99-3; s. 323, ch. 99-8; s. 3, ch. 2000-246; s. 4, ch. 2001-55; ss. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 40, ch. 2004-373; s. 5, ch. 2008-250; s. 6, ch. 2009-6; s. 10, ch. 2009-63; s. 3, ch. 2009-64; s. 3, ch. 2011-33; s. 331, ch. 2014-19; s. 15, ch. 2016-127; ss. 2, 19, ch. 2017-115; s. 14, ch. 2019-113; s. 1, ch. 2022-166.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 364 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1953–2026 · leading case: Jones v. State, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jones v. State, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002). · cites it 67× “1994), stating that "the supreme court, in dicta, discussed the fact that sentencing under section 948.01 falls within the sentencing guidelines.”

State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). · cites it 34× “Section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1973), principally in issue in these proceedings, reads in its entirety as follows: "948.”

McKendry v. State, 641 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1994). · cites it 13× “The court held that section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1989), the statute which gives a trial court authority to suspend a sentence and implement community control, could not operate to avoid the enforcement of the mandatory minimum term in section 790.”

Joseph Peter Clarke v. United States, 184 So. 3d 1107 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 12× “However, in Gazda , adjudication was not withheld pursuant to section 948.01, Florida Statutes, as it was in Jenkins’ case, but was simply postponed while the defendant was sent- for medical treatment.”

Villery v. Florida Parole & Prob. Com'n, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1981). · cites it 8× “Section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1979), authorizes the trial court to withhold imposition of sentence on a criminal defendant and instead place him on probation when it appears to the court that the defendant is not likely again to engage in a course of criminal conduct and the…”

State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1978). · cites it 9× “We have for review a decision holding that the combined period of incarceration and probation imposed under Florida's split sentencing statute, Section 948.01(4), Florida Statutes (1975), must be within the maximum period of incarceration allowed by statute for the offense for…”

Glass v. State, 574 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 1991). · cites it 13× “This interpretation is inconsistent with the procedure for straight probation as authorized by Section 948.01(3), Florida Statutes, and in conflict with Section 948.”

United States v. Bobby Jenkins, 822 F.3d 1213 (11th Cir. 2016). · cites it 5× “However, in Gazda , adjudication was not withheld pursuant to section 948.01, Florida Statutes, as it was in Jenkins’ case, but was simply postponed while the defendant was sent for medical treatment.”

Raulerson v. State, 763 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2000). · cites it 7× “, allows this Court to withhold adjudication of guilt, this Court has the unbridled discretion to make the Defendant's conduct a felony or a misdemeanor by simply exercising its discretion regarding the withholding of adjudication of guilt. The Legislature has the sole authority…”

Tory v. State, 686 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). · cites it 10× “Section 948.01(13) provides that the program may include the use of graduated sanctions, that the drug offender probation shall include surveillance and random drug testing and that the program may include the measures normally associated with community control.”

Peters v. State, 984 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 2008). · cites it 6× “" § 948.01, Fla. Stat. (2006). Although a court may not impose sentence, i.”

State v. Powell, 703 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 1997). · cites it 7× “[2] Section 948.01(11), Florida Statutes (1995), states: (11) The court may also impose a split sentence whereby the defendant is sentenced to a term of probation which may be followed by a period of incarceration or, with respect to a felony, into community control, as follows:…”

Show all 364 citing cases →

— 948.01(1) — 20 cases

State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). “Section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1973), principally in issue in these proceedings, reads in its entirety as follows: "948.”

Peters v. State, 984 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 2008). “" § 948.01, Fla. Stat. (2006). Although a court may not impose sentence, i.”

Ogden v. State, 605 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).

Bashlor v. State, 586 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).

State v. Jogan, 388 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

— 948.01(1)(a) — 2 cases

Tavaris Jamal Evans v. State of Florida (Fla. 4th DCA 2020).

In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Crim. Procedure 3.790 (Fla. 2022).

— 948.01(10) — 4 cases

State v. Burgos, 613 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).

McMillan v. State, 701 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

In re Alt. Det. Servs., Inc., 40 Fla. Supp. 2d 102 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990).

State v. Stone, 617 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).

— 948.01(11) — 11 cases

Jones v. State, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002). “1994), stating that "the supreme court, in dicta, discussed the fact that sentencing under section 948.01 falls within the sentencing guidelines.”

State v. Powell, 703 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 1997). “[2] Section 948.01(11), Florida Statutes (1995), states: (11) The court may also impose a split sentence whereby the defendant is sentenced to a term of probation which may be followed by a period of incarceration or, with respect to a felony, into community control, as follows:…”

Gibson v. Florida Dept. of Corr., 885 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2004).

Disbrow v. State, 642 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 1994).

State v. Powell, 696 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

— 948.01(12) — 2 cases

Madrigal v. State, 683 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Punta v. State, 806 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).

— 948.01(13) — 19 cases

Jones v. State, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002). “1994), stating that "the supreme court, in dicta, discussed the fact that sentencing under section 948.01 falls within the sentencing guidelines.”

State v. Ackerman, 785 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).

Ellis v. State, 816 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

State v. Roper, 915 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).

State v. Crews, 884 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

— 948.01(13)(a) — 10 cases

Tory v. State, 686 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). “Section 948.01(13) provides that the program may include the use of graduated sanctions, that the drug offender probation shall include surveillance and random drug testing and that the program may include the measures normally associated with community control.”

Jones v. State, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002). “1994), stating that "the supreme court, in dicta, discussed the fact that sentencing under section 948.01 falls within the sentencing guidelines.”

Welborn v. State, 687 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

Dean v. State, 669 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Mosley v. State, 677 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

— 948.01(13)(b) — 1 case

Jones v. State, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002). “1994), stating that "the supreme court, in dicta, discussed the fact that sentencing under section 948.01 falls within the sentencing guidelines.”

— 948.01(2) — 43 cases

Joseph Peter Clarke v. United States, 184 So. 3d 1107 (Fla. 2016). “However, in Gazda , adjudication was not withheld pursuant to section 948.01, Florida Statutes, as it was in Jenkins’ case, but was simply postponed while the defendant was sent- for medical treatment.”

United States v. Bobby Jenkins, 822 F.3d 1213 (11th Cir. 2016). “However, in Gazda , adjudication was not withheld pursuant to section 948.01, Florida Statutes, as it was in Jenkins’ case, but was simply postponed while the defendant was sent for medical treatment.”

Richardson v. State, 884 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).

State v. McFadden, 772 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2000).

Raulerson v. State, 763 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2000). “, allows this Court to withhold adjudication of guilt, this Court has the unbridled discretion to make the Defendant's conduct a felony or a misdemeanor by simply exercising its discretion regarding the withholding of adjudication of guilt. The Legislature has the sole authority…”

— 948.01(3) — 70 cases

State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). “Section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1973), principally in issue in these proceedings, reads in its entirety as follows: "948.”

State v. Kendrick, 596 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).

State v. Wilcox, 351 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).

Villery v. Florida Parole & Prob. Com'n, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1981). “Section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1979), authorizes the trial court to withhold imposition of sentence on a criminal defendant and instead place him on probation when it appears to the court that the defendant is not likely again to engage in a course of criminal conduct and the…”

Glass v. State, 574 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 1991). “This interpretation is inconsistent with the procedure for straight probation as authorized by Section 948.01(3), Florida Statutes, and in conflict with Section 948.”

— 948.01(3)(1) — 1 case

State v. A.B. Price Jr. & Victor Tyrone Sims (2018).

— 948.01(3)(a) — 2 cases

State v. Cregan, 908 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 2005).

Martin v. State, 618 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

— 948.01(4) — 82 cases

State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). “Section 948.01, Florida Statutes (1973), principally in issue in these proceedings, reads in its entirety as follows: "948.”

State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1978). “We have for review a decision holding that the combined period of incarceration and probation imposed under Florida's split sentencing statute, Section 948.01(4), Florida Statutes (1975), must be within the maximum period of incarceration allowed by statute for the offense for…”

Lewis v. State, 402 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981).

— 948.01(4)(a) — 1 case

Dietz v. State, 534 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

— 948.01(5) — 20 cases

Crawford v. State, 567 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 1990).

Sanchez v. State, 538 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).

Davis v. State, 461 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

Williams v. State, 464 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

Ogden v. State, 605 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).

— 948.01(6) — 11 cases

Gibson v. Florida Dept. of Corr., 885 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2004).

Collins v. State, 697 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

State v. Powell, 696 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

Chupka v. State, 775 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

— 948.01(7) — 3 cases

Williams v. State, 464 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

Beagling v. State, 667 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).

State v. Morrow, 700 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).

— 948.01(8) — 39 cases

McKee v. State, 528 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).

Carr v. State, 528 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).

Poore v. State, 503 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).

Jackson v. State, 615 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

— 948.01(9) — 1 case

In re Alt. Det. Servs., Inc., 40 Fla. Supp. 2d 102 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.