District Court of Appeal of Florida February 27, 2012, 1D11-3511 (Arnau v. State)

PER CURIAM.

The lower court’s revocation of appellant’s probation based upon his two violations of condition (5) was supported by the evidence. As the state concedes on appeal, however, the court erred by finding a violation of condition (10), because the trial court had not established a schedule of monthly payments.

See Hutchinson v. State,

801 So.2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).