Hillman v. State

Full title: KENNY LAYNE HILLMAN, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Apr 29, 1994

636 So. 2d 181 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Opinion

No. 93-1677.

April 29, 1994.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Volusia County, Edwin P.B. Sanders, J.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and James T. Cook, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Rebecca Roark Wall, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

W. SHARP, Judge.

Hillman appeals a special condition of his three-year probationary sentence, after he pled nolo contendere to burglary of a structure.¹ Hillman argues the trial court erred in setting a provision which requires restitution to be payable at a rate determined by his probation officer. We reverse because this court has held that it is improper for anyone other than a judge to set a payment schedule for amounts owed in restitution. Casto v. State, 615 So.2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Boss v. State, 613 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).

1 Section 810.02(3), Fla. Stat. (1989)

Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to set a payout rate on the restitution.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DIAMANTIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.