IN THE INTEREST OF B. L. G., A CHILD
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 trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to dismiss for failure to grant a speedy trial.
The appellant was taken into custody on January 19, 1981, and more than ninety days elapsed before he was brought to an adjudicatory hearing. The appe…
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 Delinquent Child cases and more on FLexlaw
LETTS, Chief Judge.
Appellant seeks review of an order of the trial court, which adjudicated the appellant a delinquent alleging that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion to dismiss pursuant to Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.180, thus denying him speedy trial. We agree and reverse.
The appellant was taken into custody on January 19, 1981, for the offenses of burglary and grand theft. After more than ninety days had elapsed from that date, the appellant filed a motion for discharge asserting that he had not been tried within the ninety day period provided in the rule. Section 39.05(7)(a), Florida Statutes (1979), provides that a child alleged to be delinquent shall be brought to an adjudicatory hearing without demand within ninety days of the earliest of the following:
(1) The date the child was taken into custody. (2) The date the petition was filed.
The court may extend the period of time prescribed in Section 39.05(7)(a) only upon a motion by the state. § 39.05(7)(c), Fla.Stat. (1979). There being no motion or extension of time granted the state pursuant to Section 39.05(7)(c), we reverse the order appealed and remand the cause to the trial court with instructions to discharge the child. See Fla.R.Juv.P. 8.180(d); In the Interest of K. L. H., 407 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); In the Interest of J. R. S. v. Hastings, 374 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); C. S. v. State, 390 So. 2d 457 (Fla.3d DCA 1980).
REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
BERANEK and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.J.S. v. State, 440 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…with the result that the time for speedy trial would lapse on June 9,1982, ninety-five days after appellant was taken into custody. Under these circumstances, appellant’s June 11 motion to dismiss should have been granted. In the Interest of B.L.G., 414 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); In the Interest of K.L.H., 407 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); M.B. v. Lee, 388 So. 2d 1364 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The order of the trial court finding that appellant committed a delinquent act and the order withholding adjudicat…
-
L.J. v. State, 423 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…found, and we agree, that the witness’s unavailability was not attributable to the state. See State v. Daniels, 413 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Dedmon v. State, 400 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). L.J.’s reliance on In the Interest of B.L.G., 414 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), is misplaced. In that case no motion for an extension of time was made by the state or granted by the trial court. In the case sub judice a motion for continuance was timely made, granted by the trial court and the requisite fin…
Authorities Cited
- The LAW Firm OF Patterson v. Gertrude Kahn Koebrich, 374 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- C. S. v. State, 390 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- In the Interest of K. L. H., 407 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)