S.R.J., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Court reversed a juvenile's probation violation adjudication and remanded for a new hearing because the trial court's failure to record the adjudicatory proceeding prevented meaningful appellate review of the sufficiency of evidence.
When an adjudicatory hearing transcript is unavailable due to the trial court's failure to record the proceeding, reversal and remand for a new hearing is required to permit meaningful appellate review.
[1] When a trial court fails to record an adjudicatory hearing and the record cannot be reconstructed, reversal and remand for a new hearing is required to ensure meaningful…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA juvenile was adjudicated for violating probation in a delinquency case, but the trial judge inadvertently turned off the digital recording at the be…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Judicial Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal of S.J.’s adjudication and sentence, resulting from an alleged violation of probation in a delinquency case, Appellant has filed a motion for new trial due to the unavailability of the adjudicatory hearing transcript. Finding that the transcript is necessary to a fair review on appeal, we reverse for a new adjudicatory hearing on Appellant’s violation of probation.
The court reporter below attested to the fact that no audible recording pertaining to the violation of probation proceeding was made below because the judge inadvertently turned off the digital recording at the beginning of the hearing. The parties attempted to reconstruct the record, but were unable to do so. Unlike cases where only a portion of a proceeding is missing and no articulated grounds are raised to support error during trial, counsel for the Appellant seeks review of the sufficiency of the evidence used to support the Appellant’s adjudications. With no ability to review any portion of the adjudicatory proceeding on appeal, no meaningful appellate review can occur in this case. See Delap v. State, 350 So. 2d 462 (Fla.1977); Williams v. Lebeau, 988 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); L.I.B. v. State, 811 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Therefore, we reverse and remand with directions that the trial court conduct a de novo violation of probation hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
TORPY, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
August Christine Cave v. Rios, 15 So. 3d 760 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…of the trial or a statement of the evidence, as permitted under Florida Rule of Appellate [*762] Procedure 9.200(b)(4), no meaningful appellate review can occur in this case, and therefore, we must affirm the order under review. See S.R.J. v. State, 997 So. 2d 498, 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (“With no ability to review any portion of the adjudicatory proceeding on appeal, no meaningful appellate review can occur in this case.”); Smith v. Orhama Inc., 907 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (“As the appellants hav…
Authorities Cited
- Delap v. State, 350 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1977)
- L.I.B. v. State, 811 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Williams v. Lebeau, 988 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)