Massaline v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT LEARIA CHAD MASSALINE, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ______________________________________) Case No. 2D05-2666 Opinion filed September 29, 2006. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands County; Olin W. Shinholser, Judge. James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Richard P. Albertine, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah Hogge, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. WHATLEY, Judge. Learia Chad Massaline appeals the amended order revoking his probation. We affirm but remand for the trial court to strike two findings. The trial court found that Massaline violated conditions five, seven, twentyseven, and twenty-eight of his probation. The greater weight of the evidence supports the finding that Massaline violated conditions five and seven. The State concedes that the trial court erred in finding that Massaline violated conditions twenty-seven and twenty-eight because the State failed to present evidence of his ability to pay the costs of supervision and court costs. Accordingly, these violations must be stricken. The record is clear that the trial court would have revoked Massaline s probation based on the violation of conditions five and seven alone. Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Massaline s probation but remand for the trial court to strike the findings that Massaline violated conditions twenty-seven and twenty-eight. Affirmed; remanded with directions. CASANUEVA and WALLACE, JJ., Concur. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
