Reflects Florida Statutes current through the 2026 session and reported decisions through 2025. § 948.06 was amended in 2026 (ch. 2026-18, ch. 2026-20), but only to rename “child pornography” to “child sexual abuse material” in the list of qualifying offenses — the mandatory-reinstatement provision discussed here is unchanged. Every statute cite links to the official text on Online Sunshine, which opens in a new window.
Florida law does contain a provision that strips a judge of discretion and requires reinstatement of probation after a violation. It is § 948.06(2)(f)1., Fla. Stat. But it is considerably narrower than “a first technical violation,” and most of the litigation under it turns on that gap.
The short answer
A judge must modify or continue probation — rather than revoke it and impose a prison sentence — only when all four of the statute’s conditions are satisfied. Failing any one of them returns full sentencing discretion to the court. Two conditions do most of the work: the violation must appear on a closed statutory list of “low-risk” violations, and it must be the probationer’s first found violation in the current term.
The detail, by topic
This subject has enough moving parts that it is split across separate pages. Each is self-contained.
Who qualifies — the four conditions
All four must be met, and failing any one returns full sentencing discretion to the court: the supervision must be probation, not community control; the probationer must not be a violent felony offender of special concern; the violation must be a low-risk technical violation on the closed statutory list; and there must be no prior found violation during the current term. Includes the full 11-item list, and why “technical” is not the same thing as “low-risk technical.”
What the judge must actually do
“Modify or continue” is not the same as reinstating probation untouched. The court may add up to 90 days in county jail as a special condition — and if fewer than 90 days of supervision remain, it may revoke outright and impose up to 90 days. The protection is from prison, not from jail.
How the protection gets lost
The three recurring ways: more than one violation, pleading guilty to a new-law violation alongside the technical one, and conduct that is genuinely technical but simply not on the list. Also covers the one holding that runs the other way — what “current term of supervision” means when there has been an earlier, already-revoked term.
Violent felony offenders of special concern — § 948.06(8)
Condition (b) excludes a VFOSC, and the exclusion cuts twice: it removes the mandatory-reinstatement protection and substitutes a much harsher regime — mandatory written findings on dangerousness, mandatory revocation if the court finds danger, and no bail pending the violation hearing. Includes all 19 qualifying offenses.
The alternative sanctioning program — § 948.06(9)
Every circuit must have one. For a first or second low-risk violation, a probation officer may offer sanctions in lieu of filing an affidavit at all. Participation is voluntary and costs the probationer counsel and a hearing — but completing it does not forfeit eligibility for mandatory reinstatement, and it can never convert a withheld adjudication into an adjudication of guilt.
How the statute got here — “any” became “all”
As enacted in 2019 the statute said the court shall modify or continue probation when “any of the following applies” — which read literally would have covered every probationer alive. Two districts applied the absurdity doctrine and read it as “all”; the Legislature then rewrote it to match. Older opinions quoting “any” are quoting dead text.
Issues to preserve
A § 948.06(2)(f) claim is most often lost on procedure rather than on the merits — it must be raised by a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion or the appellate court cannot reach it, even where the sentence was unlawful. This one applies across every topic on the site, so it lives on its own page.