A.H., A JUVENILE
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2020-06-17
No. 19-2139
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2020)

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.

Synopsis

The appellate court affirmed a trial court's decision to impose a 30-day electronic monitoring requirement as a special condition of probation for a juvenile. The court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court's decision.


Holding

No, the trial court did not abuse its discretion. The appellate court affirmed the imposition of the electronic monitoring device.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court's imposition of special conditions of probation is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

[2] A juvenile's probation may include special conditions such as mandatory school attendance, curfew, living arrangements, community service, and therapy.

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

Key Quotes

“Our standard of review of a trial court’s imposition of special conditions of probation is for an abuse of discretion.”

Establishes the legal standard the court applied to review the trial 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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A juvenile, A.H., pleaded guilty to criminal mischief and was placed on probation. As a special condition, the trial court ordered A.H. to wear an ele…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Appellant A.H., a juvenile, was charged with criminal mischief with $1000.00 or more in damage in violation of section 806.13(1)(b)(3), Florida Statutes, a third-degree felony but pleaded guilty to the lesser included offense of criminal mischief greater than $200.00 and less than $1000.00. On appeal, Appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion by ordering Appellant to wear an electronic monitoring device for 30 days. We affirm.

At the disposition hearing, the trial court withheld adjudication and placed Appellant on probation with the understanding that the court would consider early termination after one year. Pursuant to the Department of Juvenile Justice’s (“DJJ”) recommendation, the court imposed the following special conditions of the probation that required Appellant to: (1) attend school at the Associate Marine Institute; (2) be home by 7:00 p.m.; (3) live with his grandmother; (4) perform 25 hours of community service; (5) attend anger management and substance abuse therapy; and (6) not change his address without permission. Although DJJ did not recommend electronic monitoring, upon the trial court’s suggestion, DJJ agreed stating: “Okay, that will be good.”1

Our standard of review of a trial court’s imposition of special conditions of probation is for an abuse of discretion. See J.R.M. v. State, 228 So. 3d 1147, 1149

(Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (citing Spano v. State, 60 So. 3d 1108, 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)).

At the time of disposition, Appellant had two other pending cases and had previously been the subject of two pick-up orders. Further, the 30-day time period was only until the next court hearing on Appellant’s two other pending cases. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. See B.K.A. v. State, 122 So. 3d 928, 930 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“Probation is not a restrictiveness level because it is a limitation on the freedom of the child ‘in lieu of commitment to the custody of the [D]epartment.’” (citing § 985.03(44), Fla. Stat.)).

Affirmed.

Footnotes
1 Appellant waived a written predisposition report prepared by DJJ and instead agreed to a disposition by the trial judge from the bench.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw