STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
G. B. P., A CHILD, ET AL., 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 appealed orders dismissing nine delinquency petitions filed 30-45 days after complaints were referred to the Department of Health and Rehabilitation Services. The court resolved a conflict between two districts by holding that the 45-day filing deadline in Florida Statute § 39.05(6) is substantive law controlling over the 30-day requirement in Juvenile Procedure Rule 8.110(e), making all challenged petitions timely.
The statute is substantive law, and therefore § 39.05(6) controls. A petition for delinquency is timely if filed within 45 days after a complaint has been referred to the Department, notwithstanding the more restrictive 30-day rule.
[1] A statute providing a time limit for filing a petition for delinquency after a complaint is referred to the Department of Health and Rehabilitation Services is substantiv…
[2] Substantive law prescribes duties and rights, while procedural law concerns the means and methods to enforce those duties and rights.
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“Substantive law prescribes duties and rights under our system of government, and the legislature is responsible for enacting such law. Procedural law concerns the means and methods to apply and enforce those duties and rights, and the supreme court determines procedural law through the promulgation of rules.”
Establishes the foundational distinction between substantive and procedural law that governs the court's analysis
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn nine consolidated cases, petitions for delinquency were filed between 30 and 45 days after complaints against juveniles were referred to the intake…
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
DOWNEY, Judge.
These are nine consolidated appeals by the State from orders dismissing petitions for delinquency pursuant to Juvenile Procedure Rule 8.110(e) (1980). In all of the cases a petition for delinquency was filed between thirty and forty-five days after a complaint against the respective juvenile appellant was referred to the intake office of the Department of Health and Rehabilitation Services.
The appellate issue is whether Juvenile Procedure Rule 8.110(e) (1980) or Section 39.05(6), Florida Statutes (1979), controls the time within which a petition for delinquency must be filed against a juvenile after the filing of a complaint referring the juvenile to the Department. During the periods relevant to these appeals Rule 8.110(e) required a petition to be filed within thirty days after a complaint was referred to the Department. The statute allows forty-five days after a reference before the petition must be filed. The issue must be resolved by determining whether the filing time requirement is procedural or substantive. If it is the former, the rule will prevail; if the latter, the statute controls. The Fifth District Court of Appeal in P. L. H. v. Brownlee, 389 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), held the matter was procedural and followed the rule. In a later case, State v. L. H., 392 So. 2d 294 (Fla.2d DCA 1980), the Second District Court of Appeal held the manner was substantive and followed the statute. We believe the rationale of the Second District case is superior and align ourselves with the holding of that case. Consequently, we hold that the statute is substantive, and a petition for delinquency is timely if it is filed within forty-five days after a complaint has been referred to the Department.
In State v. J. A., Jr., 367 So. 2d 702, 703 (Fla.2d DCA 1979), Judge Grimes pointed out that:
Substantive law prescribes duties and rights under our system of government, and the legislature is responsible for enacting such law. Procedural law concerns the means and methods to apply and enforce those duties and rights, and the supreme court determines procedural law through the promulgation of rules. Benyard v. Wainwright, 322 So. 2d 473 (Fla.1975). Substantive law creates, defines and regulates rights, while procedural law is the legal machinery by which substantive law is made effective. State v. Garcia, 229 So. 2d 236 (Fla.1969).
The Supreme Court of Florida had an opportunity to resolve the procedural/substantive dichotomy regarding delinquency petitions in S. R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018, 1019 (Fla.1977), in determining whether the mandatory aspect of the rule should apply or the more permissive aspect of the statute. There the Court said:
The Second District Court of Appeal also held that Section 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1975), is procedural in nature and therefore subject to the rules promulgated by this Court. Again, we disagree. Section 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1975), provides a juvenile with a substantive right and substantive statutes supersede procedural rules, State v. Garcia, 229 So. 2d 236 (Fla.1969). We therefore hold that dismissal with prejudice is mandatory when a petition alleging delinquency is filed more than 30 days after a complaint is received by the intake office of the Division of Youth Services.
Accordingly, the judgment in each of the consolidated cases is reversed and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MOORE and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
R.L.B. v. State, 486 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1986)…So. 2d 1039 (Fla.1982); R.L.H. v. State, 417 So. 2d 1105 (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…
-
In the Interest of R. J. A., 406 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…PER CURIAM. Reversed on authority of State v. G. B. P., 399 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). LETTS, C. J., and DOWNEY and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Domingo Garcia, 229 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 1969)
- Benyard v. Louie L. Wainwright, 322 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1975)
- In the Interest of S. R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1977)
- Frank Edelen Buick Co. v. Calvin, 389 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- State v. L. H., 392 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)
- State v. In the Interest of J. A., JR., 367 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)