THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
G.D.C., A JUVENILE AND J.L.M., A JUVENILE, APPELLEES
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.
The State of Florida appealed the dismissal of delinquency petitions against two juveniles, arguing the petitions were timely filed. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissals, holding that reading Florida's statutes as a whole, delinquency petitions must be filed within 33 days of a juvenile's arrest—a requirement the State failed to meet.
The court held that reading Sections 39.03(2) and 39.05(7) together as a whole, a delinquency petition must be filed no later than 33 days after a juvenile is taken into custody. The petitions in these cases, filed 36 and 42 days after arrest respectively, violated the substantive right to dismissal under Section 39.05(7), and the dismissals were properly granted.
[1] A statute enacted by the legislature concerning the filing of a delinquency petition is substantive law.
[2] A rule of procedure promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court concerning the filing of a delinquency petition is procedural law.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a petition for delinquency should not be filed later than 33 days after a juvenile is taken into custody”
Establishes the substantive deadline by reading the two statutory provisions together
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.L.M. was taken into custody on March 20, 1978; an arrest affidavit was filed with the intake officer on April 6; and a delinquency petition was file…
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 Delinquency Petition cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, the State of Florida seeks review of two orders dismissing delinquency petitions against G.D.C. and J.L.M. as untimely filed.
The undisputed facts are as follows:
J.L.M. was taken into custody on March 20, 1978, an arrest affidavit was filed with the intake officer on April 6 and a delinquency petition (for assault with a deadly weapon) was filed on May 1.
G.D.C. was taken into custody on July 27, 1978, an arrest affidavit was filed with the intake officer on August 15 and a petition for delinquency (for unlawful entry and theft) was filed on September 1.
J.L.M. and G.D.C. moved to dismiss their respective petitions for violation of the 30 day rule in Section 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1977): “(7) On motions by or in behalf of a child, a petition alleging delinquency shall be dismissed with prejudice if it was not filed within 30 days from the date the complaint was referred to the intake office.”
After hearing the motions, the juvenile court dismissed the delinquency petitions on the ground that if the arrest affidavits had been filed with the intake officer within 3 days of the respective dates the juvenile respondents had been taken into custody as required by Section 39.03(2), Florida Statutes (1977),1 they would still have been entitled to dismissal under Section 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1977). We affirm.
Our Supreme Court in S. R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla.1977) held that Section 39.-05(7), Florida Statutes (1975)2 requiring dismissal with prejudice if a petition alleging delinquency is not filed within 30 days after a complaint is received by the intake officer provides a juvenile with a substantive right. The requirement that a written report is to be filed with the intake office within 3 days of the date of a juvenile’s arrest, however, has been determined to be procedural and absent a showing of prejudice, the noncompliance would not dictate automatic dismissal. G. L. T., Jr. v. State, 366 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1978).
The failure of the State to timely file the written report with the intake officer3 in the instant cases resulted in the delinquency petitions being filed 36 days after the arrest of G.D.C. and 42 days after the arrest of J.L.M. Reading Section 39.03(2) and 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1977) as a whole, a petition for delinquency should not be filed later than 33 days after a juvenile is taken into custody. We therefore, conclude that the substantive right of G.D.C. and J.L.M. under Section 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1977) was violated when the respective petitions were filed in excess of 33 days after their arrests and the petitions were properly dismissed. Cf. A. W. v. State, 358 So. 2d 71 (Fla.3d DCA 1978).
Affirmed.
.“Within 3 days of the time the child is taken into custody, a supplemental report containing sufficient information to establish the jurisdiction of the court and to support a finding by the court that the child is delinquent or dependent shall be submitted to the appropriate intake officer.”
. Same as the current statute.
. 19 days after the arrest of G.D.C. and 17 days after the arrest of J.L.M.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
G.A. v. State, 391 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…e statutes and the case law and concluded that the juvenile’s substantive rights are violated and he is entitled to relief if the petition for delinquency is not filed within 33 days of the date the juvenile is taken into custody. State v. G. D. C., 372 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). We agree with this analysis. Here, the JCR and the petition for delinquency were both filed on February 21, 1979, 59 days after G.A. was taken into custody, 26 days late. We agree with the trial court that G.A. needs rehabilitat…
-
R.L.B. v. State, 486 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1986)…105 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); State v. R.J., 415 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); State v. D.B.C., 413 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); I.H. v. State, 405 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); State v. G.B.P., 399 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); State v. G.D.C., 372 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); T.R. v. State, 364 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Where the state’s failure to bring formal charges within the required time period results in the somewhat drastic remedy of absolute curtailment of the state’s ability to bring…
-
S. M. v. State, 398 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…ued. In construing the predecessor provision analogous to Section 39.05(6), supra, it has been settled that the timely filing of a petition for delinquency confers a substantive right. S. R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla.1977). In State v. G.D.C., 372 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), we determined that the predecessor provisions of the cited statutes should be construed as a whole so that a petition for delinquency filed beyond the aggregate time allotted under both provisions should be dismissed as untimely.…
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of S. R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1977)
- In the Interest of G. L. T., JR. v. State, 366 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1978)
- Fernandez v. State, 358 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)