Willfulness Must be Proven to Violate Florida Probation for Failure to Pay
Willfulness Must be Proven to Violate Florida Probation for Failure to Pay
The Florida Supreme Court has held it is unconstitutional to make a finding of a probation violation without inquiring into the probationer’s ability to pay. The Court also found a state law that raises the burden of proof upon the probationer to a level higher than that of the State is unconstitutional.
Carlos Del Valle appealed a finding that he was in arrears on a probationary requirement that he pay $1,809.90 in restitution at his revocation hearing, the only evidence presented as to the violation was that Del Valle had been informed of the terms of his probation and that he was in arrears. There was no inquiry into his ability to pay before the finding of a violation and sentencing to boot camp. In fact, the trial court had been informed by Del Valle that he did not have a job.
Citing Bearden v. Georgia,461 U.S. 660 (1983) and Stephens v. State, 630 So.2d 1090 (Fla. 1994), the Florida Supreme Court held that “a probationer cannot have his probation constitutionally revoked absent an inquiry into ability to pay and a specific finding of willfulness, and a trial court’s failure to conduct such an inquiry or make such a finding cannot be deemed harmless.”
In determining willfulness of the violation, a trial court must “consider the probationer’s employment status, earning ability, financial resources, willfulness of failure to pay, and any other special circumstances that may have a bearing on the probationer’s ability to pay.”
Finally, the Court held that the provision of §948.06 (5), Florida Statutes (1995) that requires the probationer to prove inability to pay by clear and convincing evidence, a standard of proof higher than that required of the State to prove the violation, “is constitutionally infirm because it requires the defendant to bear a greater risk of an erroneous decision resulting in imprisonment for debt, despite an explicit protection in Florida’s Constitution against imprisonment for debt.
The Court disapproved of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision and precedent on this issue, but approved the decisions of all other state appellate courts on the issue as they required a showing of willfulness to find a violation of probation for failure to pay. See: Del Valle v. State, 80 So.3d 999, 1011 (Fla. 2011).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal cases
Del Valle v. State
| Year | 2011 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 80 So.3d 999, 1011 (Fla. 2011) |
| Level | State Supreme Court |
| Conclusion | Bench Verdict |
Stephens v. State
| Year | 1994 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 630 So.2d 1090 (Fla. 1994) |
| Level | State Supreme Court |
| Conclusion | Bench Verdict |
Bearden v. Georgia
| Year | 1983 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 461 U.S. 660 (1983) |
| Level | Supreme Court |
| Conclusion | Bench Verdict |