LINDA DAVANZO and ANDREW DAVANZO v. BANK UNITED, N.A.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that probation condition ordering “treatment as deemed necessary” was ambiguous and new requirement that defendant undergo random urine screens added by probation officer was not valid
• \probationers are entitled to reasonably specific conditions that provide clear guidelines as to what and when their actions or omissions will constitute a violation of their probation\
• “probationers are entitled to reasonably specific conditions that provide clear guidelines as to what and when their actions or omissions will constitute a violation of their probation”
• “As in criminal statutes, ambiguities in probation conditions are construed in favor of the defendant”
• “probationers are entitled to reasonably specific conditions that provide clear guidelines as to what and when their actions or omissions will constitute a violation of their probation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).