DEAN ALLEN MIDDLETON, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHN POLK, SHERIFF, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
A defendant convicted by jury but with adjudication withheld sought habeas corpus relief after bail was revoked for violating a condition requiring him to reside with his father. The Florida appellate court denied the petition, holding that such residency conditions are reasonable bail requirements under the state constitution.
The court held that the residency condition was reasonable. The word 'reasonable' in the bail context is not restricted to monetary amounts but may also relate to the sufficiency of the surety and conditions of the bond. Trial judges must consider family ties in determining conditions of release that reasonably assure appearance before conviction.
[1] A person is entitled to release on reasonable bail until adjudged guilty, even after a guilty verdict.
[2] The term "reasonable bail" encompasses conditions of release, not solely monetary amounts.
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“The word 'reasonable' is not restricted to the monetary amount of the bail bond but may also relate to the sufficiency of the surety and to the conditions of the bond.”
Establishes that bail reasonableness encompasses more than just monetary amount and includes conditions like residency requirements.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA jury found Middleton guilty of a criminal offense. The trial judge withheld adjudication of guilt, ordered a presentence investigation, and released…
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 Writ Of Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
A jury found the petitioner guilty of a criminal offense. The trial judge withheld adjudication of guilt, ordered a presen-tence investigation and released petitioner on bond on the express condition that petitioner reside with his father. The petitioner failed to abide by this condition, the trial judge revoked bail and petitioner was confined under a bench warrant.
Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus, citing Andress v. Coleman, 320 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. dismissed, 320 So. 2d 393 (Fla.1975), which holds that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure, 3.550, which implies that an accused can be confined without bond after a verdict of guilty, must yield to Article I, Section 14, Florida Constitution, which guarantees that until adjudged guilty every person shall be entitled to release on reasonable bail.1 The word “reasonable” is not restricted to the monetary amount of the bail bond but may also relate to the sufficiency of the surety and to the conditions of the bond. Carter v. Carson, 370 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
Even in determining which form of release will reasonably assure appearance before a finding of guilt the trial judge is required to take into account the defendant’s family ties. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.130(b)(4)(iii).
Under the circumstances of this case we cannot hold, as a matter of law, that this condition of release on bail is unreasonable.
Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is
DENIED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and COBB, J., concur. . The petitioner’s right to release on bail before conviction is not affected by the breach of the conditions of an earlier release unless the trial judge determines that the petitioner’s conduct in that instance evinces a flagrant disregard of the court’s authority or an effort to evade its processes so as to justify a forfeiture of his bail rights. See Ex parte McDaniel, 86 Fla. 145, 97 So. 317 (1923); Hancock v. State, 386 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Paul v. Jenne, 728 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…tion would be a violation of a reasonable condition of bail. The court stated: The constitution, however, grants reasonable, not unbridled, release. Should a defendant violate a reasonable condition to bail, bail can be revoked. Middleton[ v. Polk, 399 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)]. Having been provided reasonable bail only to violate a condition thereof, a defendant cannot claim he has been deprived of his constitutional right to bail should the trial court reasonably deny subsequent applications for bail…
-
Gardner v. Ernest P. "Kayo" Murphy, 402 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…e, 386 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), the trial court concluded that Gardner’s past conduct was sufficient to forfeit his constitutional right to release on bail. We agree with the trial judge that Hancock and the later cases of Middleton v. Polk, 399 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), and Johnson v. Pellicer, 388 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), indicate there are situations where Florida’s constitutional right to be released on bail can be forfeited upon conduct that “evinces a flagrant disregard of the court…
Authorities Cited
- Ex Parte, 86 Fla. 145 (Fla. 1923)
- Andress v. Coleman, 320 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- State v. Dusty R. Spencer, 320 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1975)
- Carter v. Carson, 370 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- Hancock v. State, 386 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)