CRANZ V. STATE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2003 NICHOLAS CRANZ, Appellant, vs. ** ** ** THE STATE OF FLORIDA Appellee. ** CASE NO. 3D02-3105 LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 99-287 ** Opinion filed September 24, 2003. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Florida, William R. Ptomey, Judge. Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Bruce A. Rosenthal, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Consuelo Maingot (Ft. Lauderdale), Assistant Attorney General, and Melissa Vaughan Rubin, Certified-Out-Of-State Practitioner, for appellee. Before RAMIREZ and WELLS, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM. In this case the defendant s community control was held to have been violated (1) for being briefly absent from his residence to retrieve a birthday present from his parked car for his son, and (2) for being only a short distance away buying cigarettes. Defendant was otherwise complying with community control and all other special terms and conditions of his probation and the trial judge expressed his belief in the defendant s explanation for his absences from the home. The greater weight of the evidence did not show that the two acts should have been considered as a willful and substantial violation of the community control. McCray v. State, 754 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Dassau v. State, 731 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Inept or negligent conduct is insufficient to demonstrate willfulness. McCray, supra, at 778. Accordingly, the revocation of defendant s community control is reversed. 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.
