Adding Sex Offender Probation Conditions After Sentencing Not Permitted

Last week, the 2nd District Court of Appeals in Florida ruled that adding special sex offender conditions to probation after sentencing, where those conditions were expressly excluded at sentencing, doesn’t fly.

In Jones v. State, Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 2nd Dist. 2018, the court reversed a lower court’s order that allowed the State to impose special conditions of sex offender probation on Jones, when those conditions were not part of his sentence.

At Jones’ plea hearing and sentencing, it was agreed that “there had been no actual victim under age eighteen and sex offender probation conditions required in cases involving minor victims would not apply”. Nonetheless, upon his release from prison, probation tried to impose special conditions of sex offender probation on him. The lower court allowed them to.

The appellate Court, however, relying on Burkhart v. State, 974 So. 2d 1203, 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)., which held “Because probation is considered a sentence in Florida, an enhancement or extension of the conditions of probation after the conclusion of the sentencing hearing generally constitutes a violation of the double jeopardy prohibitions of the United States and Florida constitutions.” did not allow it and reversed.


1 Comment

Add a Comment
  1. This is not the case as I fell in 2003, was placed on monitor due to homelessness, transferred to another county to a residential address, which I have maintained for over six and a half years, am still wearing the monitor, although my current P.O. does not seek monitoring nor does his supervisor, yet the court continues to force me to wear it and recently granted to State’s object to removal in clear violation of rule 3.800(c)!!! Case law and the Constitution mean nothing in Florida and no one, including the ACLU, NARSOL or FAC give a hoot about this!!!

Leave a Reply