STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL. HOWARD NEICEN, PETITIONER,
v.
NICK NAVARRO, AS SHERIFF OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE HONORABLE JUDGE JOHN A. FRUSCIANTE, OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENTS
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.
A trial court's policy to refuse bond for defendants charged with new offenses while on pretrial release is contrary to Florida statutes and case law.
Petitioner was charged with burglary, released into a pretrial intervention program, then charged with possession of a short-barreled shotgun while st…
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 Pretrial Intervention Program cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks review of the trial court’s order revoking his bond and committing him to pretrial custody.
Petitioner was charged with burglary of a conveyance and was released pursuant to a pretrial intervention program. Subsequently, while still in the pretrial intervention program, petitioner was charged with possession of a short-barreled shotgun and was released after posting a $1,000 bond. Thereafter, at a hearing on a motion for a defense continuance, the trial court revoked petitioner’s bond, indicating that it has a policy to refuse bond on charges allegedly committed while the defendant is already on release pending resolution of another criminal proceeding. The court did not find that petitioner is unlikely to appear in court for further proceedings.
The trial court’s stated policy is contrary to section 907.041, Florida Statutes (1991). See also and compare Gomez v. Hinckley, 473 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA1985); § 903.-046, Fla.Stat. (1991); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.131(a). Accordingly, we agree with petitioner that habeas relief is appropriate.
We reject the state’s contention that the clerical mistake in petitioner’s address resulted in the revocation of bail. We also note that the state’s reliance on rule 3.131(f), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, is misplaced, as that rule is applicable only after trial has begun. Also, the dicta in Harp v. Hinckley, 410 So. 2d 619 (Fla. 4th DCA1982), upon which the state relies was superseded by section 907.041, Florida Statutes (1991).
Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and remand with instructions to the trial court to hold a hearing and to set reasonable bond for petitioner within 48 hours of receipt of this opinion.
DOWNEY, GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…inding of danger to the community can be used as a factor in determining bail or other conditions, Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.131(b)(3), it cannot be the entire basis for pretrial detention, see § 907.041(4)(b)4.a-e. See also State ex rel. Neicen v. Navarro, 603 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Carthen v. Wille, 602 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Gomez v. Hinckley, 473 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Furtney v. State, 679 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). Accordingly, we vacate the order granting the State’s motion to…
-
Houser v. Manning, 719 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…which refusal of any further bond was well warranted. The trial court’s denial of any further bond was entirely reasonable. II. Defendant contends that he is entitled to release on bond under the rule announced in State ex rel. Neicen v. Navarro, 603 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Defendant misinterprets that case. In Neicen, defendant was charged with burglary (case number one) and was released to a pretrial intervention program. See id. at 136. Thereafter, he was charged with possession of a short barre…
Authorities Cited
- Gomez v. The Honorable Harry G. Hinckley, Jr., 473 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Brady v. Jersted, 410 So. 2d 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Harp v. The Honorable Harry G. Hinckley, 410 So. 2d 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)