Pickard v. State
The Fifth DCA affirmed revocation of Appellant's probation, finding competent substantial evidence supported violations of conditions requiring reporting and drug testing, but not the condition requiring him to obey the law (the false-name charge failed because he gave the false name before lawful detention). Because the revocation did not depend on that erroneous ground, the court remanded only for a corrected order identifying the correct violated conditions. However, applying the Wilson/Simplice vindictive-sentencing factors, the court reversed the 20-year sentence—ten times the 2-year offer the judge made during plea negotiations—and remanded for resentencing before a different judge.
Key facts
- Appellant was on probation with conditions requiring him to report, submit to drug testing, and obey the law.
- The trial court found Appellant violated the reporting and drug-testing conditions, and also charged him with violating the obey-the-law condition based on a false-identification offense.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion provides a clear, fact-specific application of the Wilson/Simplice four-factor test for judicial vindictiveness in the plea-negotiation context, illustrating how a trial judge's active participation in… — 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.