C.L.S., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1992-02-05
No. 91-03450
DANAHY and LEHAN, JJ., concur.
592 So. 2d 1257 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1992)

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.


Holding

The court held that the adjudication of delinquency for escaping a juvenile detention facility should be reversed based on precedent from similar cases.


Facts & Procedural History

The appellant, a child, was adjudicated delinquent for escaping a juvenile detention facility. The appellant was a codefendant with other individuals …

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
SCHOONOVER, Chief Judge.

SCHOONOVER, Chief Judge.

C.L.S., a child, challenges an adjudication of delinquency for escaping from a juvenile detention facility in violation of section 39.-061, Florida Statutes (Supp.1990). We reverse.

In K.K.P. v. State, 590 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), this court considered the same factual situation and adopted the holding of our sister court in L.V.M. v. State, 584 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). In L.V.M., L.V.M., K.K.P., and the appellant in this case were codefendants at the same adjudicatory hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the appellant was found guilty of committing a delinquent act by escaping from a juvenile detention facility with the other codefendants. The juvenile court transferred the appellant’s case to Polk County for disposition. The appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the final order entered in Polk County.

In L. V.M., the court found that the facts were not materially distinguishable from those presented in K.A.N. v. State, 582 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), and reversed L.V.M.’s adjudication and remanded with directions to discharge him. We agree again with our sister court’s holding in L.V.M. and, accordingly, on the authority of K.A.N., L.V.M., and K.K.P., reverse and remand with instructions to discharge the appellant on the escape charge.

Reversed and remanded.

DANAHY and LEHAN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw