STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
B.T.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 State appealed a juvenile sanction imposed on B.T.G., arguing that a prior firearm offense required criminal sanctions. The appellate court affirmed the juvenile sanction, finding insufficient record evidence to support the State's claim of a prior disqualifying offense.
No, the appellate court held that the State failed to provide sufficient record evidence to support its claim of a prior disqualifying adjudication. Therefore, the juvenile sanction imposed by the trial court is affirmed.
[1] When the State appeals a juvenile sanction imposed on a defendant charged as an adult, the State bears the burden of producing sufficient record evidence to demonstrate t…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”
This quote states the court's primary reason for affirming the lower court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceB.T.G. was charged as an adult and received a juvenile sanction. The State appealed, contending that a prior adjudication for a firearm offense mandat…
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 Juvenile Sanctions cases and more on FLexlaw
WINOKUR, J.
The State of Florida appeals the juvenile sanction imposed upon B.T.G. after he was charged as an adult pursuant to section 985.557(2), Florida Statutes (2018), and sentenced pursuant to section 985.557(2)(d)2.a., Florida Statutes (2018). The State claims that the foregoing statute prohibited the trial judge from imposing juvenile sanctions and required criminal sanctions instead because B.T.G. had earlier been adjudicated for an offense involving a firearm.* Because there is insufficient record evidence to support
* The 2018 version of section 985.557 was in effect at the time B.T.G. was charged. But in 2019, subsection (2) of this section was a finding that B.T.G had a previous adjudication or withhold of adjudication of a forcible felony or offense involving a firearm, or had been previously placed in a residential program as enumerated in section 985.557(2)(d)2.a., we affirm. See, e.g., State v. G.B., 588 So. 2d 253, 254–55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that the burden is on the State as appellant to produce a sufficient record to demonstrate reversible error).
AFFIRMED.
B.L. THOMAS and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur. _____________________________