Conseillant v. State
Conseillant's probation was revoked after he admitted to violating probation by 'being arrested on a new charge,' rather than admitting to actually committing a new law violation. The Sixth DCA reversed, holding that revocation based solely on an admission to an arrest, without proof or admission of the underlying criminal conduct, is improper and constitutes fundamental error reviewable even though unpreserved.
Key facts
- Conseillant's probation was revoked after he admitted to 'being arrested on a new charge' during a violation of probation hearing, without admitting to or the State proving he actually committed any underlying criminal conduct.
- The trial court accepted Conseillant's admission of arrest as the sole basis for revoking his probation.
- +1 more key fact with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision reinforces the well-established rule from Hines v. State that mere arrest cannot serve as the basis for probation revocation, and clarifies that a defendant's colloquy admission phrased in terms of 'being… — 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.