THETUS FLEMMING, PETITIONER,
v.
RON COCHRAN, SHERIFF OF BROWARD COUNTY, RESPONDENT
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.
Thetus Flemming sought habeas corpus relief from two bond revocation orders issued on April 22, 1997. The court granted relief as to one case where the trial court sua sponte revoked and increased bond without notice or state motion, but denied relief as to the other case where the state had properly moved for revocation based on a subsequent arrest.
The trial court impermissibly revoked and increased bond in the second case sua sponte in violation of notice requirements and lacked authority to do so. The trial court properly revoked and reset bond in the first case where the state had provided adequate notice and moved for revocation.
[1] A trial court may not sua sponte revoke or increase a defendant's bond without prior notice to the defendant or their counsel.
[2] A defendant's attorney of record has standing to object to the revocation or modification of a defendant's bond.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 trial court impermissibly increased the bond in the second case on its own motion. The court lacked authority to do so.”
Establishes the core holding that the trial court violated its authority by sua sponte modifying bond without proper procedures.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFlemming was arrested on January 30, 1997, for cocaine possession with intent to deliver and released on $2,500 bond. He was arrested again on March 1…
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 Attorney Of Record cases and more on FLexlaw
SHAHOOD, Judge.
Petitioner, Thetus Flemming, seeks habeas corpus relief from two orders dated April 22, 1997, that revoked his bond in two felony cases and reset each bond in a higher amount. We grant the petition in one case (case number 97-5517 CF10) but deny relief in the other ease (case number 97-2008 CF10).
On January 30,1997, petitioner was arrested and charged with possession of cocaine with intent to deliver (case no. 97-2008 CF10). He was released on $2,500.00 bond.
On March 18, 1997, he was again arrested and charged with possession of cocaine with intent to deliver (case no. 97-5517 CF10). He was released on $3,600.00 bond in that case.
Appearing in court on April 14, 1997, for a status conference and a hearing on petitioner’s motion for partial indigency, the state announced that it would be seeking revocation of petitioner’s bond in case no. 97-2008 CF10 based on petitioner’s second arrest. Respondent did not announce any intent to seek revocation of the bond in the second case.
At the bond hearing, the state argued only for revocation of bond in the first case, based on petitioner’s arrest in the second case. The trial court revoked petitioner’s bond in the first case and reset the bond in a higher amount. The court then sua sponte revoked bond in the second case and reset the bond in a higher amount.
Petitioner’s counsel objected that there had been no notice given that the bond in the second case was subject to revocation or modification. The trial court stated that counsel had no standing to object because he did not represent petitioner in the second case.
Shortly thereafter at the same hearing, the trial court ruled that counsel was acting as petitioner’s counsel in the second case:
PETITIONER’S COUNSEL: As far as Mr. Flemming in the second case, I think that he ought to be examined for indigen-cy.
THE COURT: Thank you. And if he wants to do that, I am sure he can file a request for that. Because you are making that request, it effectively makes you his attorney of record.
PETITIONER’S COUNSEL: I don’t think so.
THE COURT: That, too, is a different [sic] of opinion. I think by virtue of being here and making that request, you are his attorney.
PETITIONER’S COUNSEL: Well, fine....
The trial court impermissibly increased the bond in the second case on its own motion. The court lacked authority to do so. Merdian v. Cochran, 654 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA1995).
Because the trial court ruled that counsel represented the petitioner for some purposes relating to the second case, we conclude that counsel was also authorized to object on the petitioner’s behalf to the lack of notice.
Because the modification of bond in the second case violated the notice requirements of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.131(d)(2)1 and the law as explained in this court’s decision in Meridian, we grant the petition and quash the bond order that modified the bond in the second case (97-5517 CF10). We hold that the trial court permissibly revoked and reset petitioner’s bond in the first case (97-2008 CF10) and deny the petition as to that order. GRANTED AND QUASHED IN PART; DENIED IN PART.
GLICKSTEIN and WARNER, JJ., concur. . "The state may apply for modification of bail by showing good cause and with at least 3 hours’ notice to the attorney for the defendant.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Robinson, 756 So. 2d 249 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…. Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996); Holland v. State, 696 So. 2d 757 (Fla.1997); State v. Chaney, 744 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Covington v. State, 728 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); State v. Girard, 694 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). The subjective intent of the police officer who made the stop as whether the officer would have stopped another vehicle for that infraction and whether he and the canine unit were on a hunt for suspected drug dealers is not rele…
-
Bowers v. Jenne, 710 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…notice to counsel for the defendant. Here, the state did not move to increase bond on the grounds identified by the trial court, and no prior notice was given to Petitioner. A trial court may not increase bond on its own motion. Flemming v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). To the extent that the trial court increased bond on the grounds of Petitioner’s prior record or evidence against him, this is improper because the state did not show that this information was not available to the committing ma…
-
Cousino v. Jenne, 717 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…oking petitioner’s bond and remanding him into custody on July 13, 1998. That led to this petition for "writ of habeas corpus. The trial court impermissibly increased bond on its own motion, which it is without authority to do. Flemming v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Merdian v. Cochran, 654 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.131(d)(2) provides that bond may be modified on motion by the state showing goo…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Merdian v. Cochran, 654 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)