Appellant’s testimony reflects that he could not make the first appointment because of a lack of transportation but that he telephoned his probation officer to reschedule the appointment. Appellant’s testimony, while unclear, also suggests that he attended the second appointment, but was rejected because he did not have money to pay the fee. Regarding the third appointment, appellant became unemployed and could not afford the fee. A violation of probation will not be found where the violation is due to negligence or ineptitude. See Thomas v. State, 672 So.2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (concluding that inept and negligent failure of probationer to return to halfway house on time did not amount to willful violation of probation); Stevens v. State, 599 So.2d 254 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (<HOLDING>). Further, a violation will not be found where
holding that failure to file a monthly report was not deliberate violation of probation where probationer was incarcerated holding that failure to report to probation office as instructed was not willful violation of probation where probationer was imprisoned at time of scheduled appointment holding that there was no willful or deliberate violation of probation where probationer was absent from meeting of sex offender program due to inept and negligent conduct holding evidence was legally insufficient to support conviction for violation of sex offender registration requirement recognizing that probation condition required probationer to enter into and successfully complete a sex offender treatment program but finding that no condition of probation was imposed that required him to admit to a counselor the sexual acts charged