IN THE INTEREST OF J.S., 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.
In this juvenile delinquency appeal, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's community control sentence imposed on a 12-year-old child, finding that the duration exceeded statutory maximums for the offenses committed.
The court held that the community control sentence violated Florida Statutes Section 39.11(1)(a)1, which limits community control duration to no longer than the sentence that could be imposed if the child were committed for the offense. For burglary of a structure (a third-degree felony with a 5-year maximum), the sentence to the child's 19th birthday exceeded the lawful maximum, and the 180-day period for petit theft also exceeded the allowable period of 60 days.
[1] A child's community control program duration cannot exceed the maximum sentence an adult could receive for the equivalent offense.
[2] The maximum term of incarceration for burglary of a structure, a third-degree felony, is five years.
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 duration of such supervision or program shall not be longer than the sentence that could be imposed if the child were committed for the offense.”
Establishes the statutory limitation on community control duration in juvenile cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.S., a 12-year-old child, was adjudicated delinquent for burglary of a structure (a third-degree felony) and petit theft following an adjudicatory he…
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 Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
NIMMONS, Judge.
After an adjudicatory hearing, the trial court determined that J.S., a 12-year-old child, had committed burglary of a structure and petit theft. The court withheld adjudication of delinquency and placed him on community control. The order stated, in pertinent part:
ORDERED that said Community Control Program remain in effect for an indeterminate period not to exceed said Child’s 19th birthday, but not less than 180 days as to Count I, and as to Count II, a term of 180 days, to run concurrent with Count I.
J.S. asserts on appeal that the term of community control imposed by the court was in excess of the maximum allowed by law. We agree.
Section 39.11(1)(a)1., Florida Statutes (1987), provides in pertinent part:
1. Community control programs for children shall be supervised by the de partment or by any other person or agency specifically authorized by the court_ When supervision or a program of public service is ordered by the court, the duration of such supervision or program shall not be longer than the sentence that could be imposed if the child were committed for the offense.
Under the provisions of Section 39.11(4) 1, a child may not be committed for a period in excess of the time to which an adult could be incarcerated for the equivalent offense.
Burglary of a structure is a third degree felony punishable by a maximum term of incarceration of 5 years. Therefore, the outer limit of the indeterminate period specified by the trial court, to wit: J.S.’s 19th birthday, is in excess of the maximum allowable under Chapter 39. Also, the 180-day period specified by the court for the petit theft count is in excess of the period allowable. The maximum period as to this count is 60 days.
Accordingly, the appealed order is reversed with respect to the duration of community control and the cause is remanded for modification of the order in conformance with this opinion.
ERVIN, J„ and WILLIS, BEN C. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur. . Section 39.11(4) provides:
(4) Any commitment of a delinquent child to the department shall be for an indeterminate period of time, but that time shall not exceed the maximum term of imprisonment which an adult may serve for the same offense.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
E.J. v. State, 595 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…erm of community control or community service to the maximum term for which an adult could have been sentenced for the same offense. R.D. v. State, 564 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); M.G. v. State, 556 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); J.S. v. State, 552 So. 2d 327, 328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); R.H. v. State, 549 So. 2d 742, 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). The offense in the instant case was committed October 13, 1990. Section 39.-054, Florida Statutes (Supp.1990), effective October 1, 1990, replacing Section 39.11, Flor…
-
In the Interest of R.D. v. State, 564 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…nth birthday. Since the child was found guilty of the offense of criminal mischief, a second degree misdemeanor, the maximum statutorily authorized period of community control was sixty days. Section 39.11, Florida Statutes (1989) and J.S. v. State, 552 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Accordingly, the appealed order is affirmed, except as to the duration of community control. That portion of the appealed order which specifies the duration of community control is reversed, and the cause is remanded for modific…
-
A.D.A. v. State, 564 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…by the court is in excess of that permitted by law. This juvenile was charged with and found guilty of petit theft. As we have previously held, the maximum period of community control which may be imposed for petit theft is 60 days. J.S. v. State, 552 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). As we stated in J.S., this result is dictated by the provisions of Sections 39.11(l)(a)l. and 39.-11(4), Florida Statutes. Accordingly, the subject disposition order is affirmed except for the term of community control as to w…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence