Bean v. State
The Sixth DCA reversed a probation revocation because the trial court based its willfulness findings partly on violations (failure to report in December-February) that were never charged in the revocation affidavits, and because the State failed to rebut the defendant's testimony of inability to pay supervision fees and inability to afford a psychological evaluation for anger management class. Because it was unclear whether the trial court would have revoked probation based solely on the one properly proven violation (failure to report in October/November 2021), the court remanded for reconsideration.
Key facts
- Bean was on probation and the State filed revocation affidavits charging him with failures to report during specific months (October/November 2021).
- The trial court found Bean willfully violated his probation based partly on additional failures to report in December-February that were never charged in the affidavits, and based on failure to pay supervision fees and costs for a psychological evaluation without finding he had the ability to pay.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion reinforces two recurring VOP defenses: the affidavit-charging requirement (courts cannot revoke on uncharged conduct) and the ability-to-pay requirement for fee-based violations, requiring an affirmative… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.