Keion Ware v. State of Florida

No. 3D24-2001 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 5, 2025) · Florida Third District Court of Appeal · November 5, 2025 · No. No. 3D24-2001

Summary

The Third District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed the circuit court’s revocation of Keion Ware’s probation. The court held, citing prior decisions, that the revocation decision was not an abuse of discretion and that corroborated hearsay and the defendant’s false exculpatory statements or admissions could support a probation violation.

Court
Florida Third District Court of Appeal
Writing for the Court
Per curiam; Chief Judge SCALES; Judge LOGUE; Judge MILLER
Jurisdiction
Florida Third District Court of Appeal
Decision date
November 5, 2025
Docket number
No. 3D24-2001
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in a probation-revocation proceeding.
Standard of review
A trial court's decision to revoke probation is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Keion Ware v. State of Florida
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

probationhearsayevidencestandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedureprobationevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion in revoking Ware's probation.
  2. Whether hearsay evidence, when corroborated by direct evidence, may support a violation of probation.
  3. Whether the appellant's own admissions or false exculpatory statements could be considered substantive evidence supporting the probation violation.

Holdings

  1. The circuit court's decision to revoke Ware's probation was affirmed because the appellate court found no abuse of discretion.
  2. Hearsay evidence is admissible in probation-violation hearings and may sustain a violation when corroborated by direct evidence.
  3. A defendant's false exculpatory statements made to police may constitute substantive evidence tending to show consciousness of guilt, and a defendant's own admission is not hearsay merely because it is an admission against interest.

Key quotations

Hearsay evidence is admissible in violation of probation hearings and can sustain a violation when corroborated by direct evidence. (slip op. at 2)
Certainly, a defendant’s false exculpatory statements made to the police to avoid prosecution for a crime constitute ‘substantive evidence tending to affirmatively show a consciousness of guilt on [the defendant’s] part for committing that crime.’ (slip op. at 2)
an admission against interest is hearsay which, standing alone, cannot suffice as proof of violation of a condition of probation (slip op. at 2)
a defendant’s admission, as opposed to statements by third parties, is [n]ot hearsay (slip op. at 2)

Factual background

The opinion does not describe the underlying facts in detail. It indicates that the probation-revocation decision involved hearsay evidence, corroborating direct evidence, and the appellant's allegedly false exculpatory statements or admissions.

Procedural history

The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reviewed the circuit court's decision revoking Ware's probation. The court affirmed in a brief per curiam opinion, citing authorities concerning abuse-of-discretion review, hearsay in probation-violation hearings, and the evidentiary significance of a defendant's statements.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…