MATTHEW METZGER, PETITIONER,
v.
RON COCHRAN, SHERIFF OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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.
A Florida appellate court granted a habeas corpus petition challenging the revocation of a defendant's bond in a manslaughter case. The trial court improperly revoked bond and ordered pretrial detention based solely on a violation of a release condition without making the required statutory findings or considering alternative conditions of release.
A trial court may arrest and commit a defendant for breach of bail conditions, but refusing to impose any conditions of release thereafter constitutes pretrial detention, which requires the State to prove by clear and convincing evidence that detention is necessary. A trial court cannot base pretrial detention solely on danger to the community; it must make the findings required by statute and rule and consider whether conditions of release can assure safety.
[1] A trial court may arrest and commit a defendant at large on bail for a breach of the undertaking, but refusing to impose any conditions of release thereafter constitutes…
[2] The State must prove the need for pretrial detention beyond a reasonable doubt.
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“refusing to impose any conditions of release thereafter constitutes pretrial detention, the need for which the State must prove, § 907.041(4)(f), beyond a reasonable doubt”
Establishes that pretrial detention requires clear and convincing proof by the State, not merely violation of a condition
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner was charged with two counts of unlawful blood alcohol manslaughter. He was released on bond subject to conditions, including a prohibition …
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 Revocation Of Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In his petition for writ of habeas corpus, Petitioner asserts that the trial court erred in granting the State’s motion to revoke bond on two unlawful blood alcohol manslaughter counts and ordering him held without bond after a positive urine test for cannabis confirmed he violated a condition of pretrial release, imposed with Petitioner’s agreement in lieu of additional bond. We agree and grant the writ.
The State argued that Petitioner qualified for pretrial detention because he posed a threat to the community, but conceded to the trial court that none of the conditions of section 907.041(4)(b)4.a-c, Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), applied. The trial court was under the impression that because Petitioner had agreed to certain conditions and had violated one of them, his bond could be revoked and he could be held without bond, without any further consideration of whether he was entitled to pretrial release. The trial court’s order did not include the pretrial detention findings required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.132(c)(2) and section 907.041(4)(h).
The trial court has the authority under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.131(g)(1) to arrest and commit a defendant at large on bail for a breach of the undertaking; however, refusing to impose any conditions of release thereafter constitutes pretrial detention, the need for which the State must prove, § 907.041(4)(f), beyond a reasonable doubt, Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.132(c)(1). Merdian v. Cochran, 654 So. 2d 573, 576 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). While a finding 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 revoke bond and remand for further proceedings, in which the trial court should consider whether there are any conditions of release that can assure the safety of the community. If the trial court again determines that pretrial detention is necessary, it shall include the findings required by rule 3.132(e)(2) and section 907.041(4)(h) in its order. FARMER, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
State v. Paul, 783 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2001)…tatute. See Lepore v. Jenne, 708 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Blackman v. State, 707 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Surdovel v. Jenne, 706 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Dupree v. Cochran, 698 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Merdian v. Cochran, 654 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). In Paul, Judge Taylor explained the reasoning behind the contrary view:13 Although we agree with Houser that a trial court has the authority to revoke a defendant’s bond u…
-
Paul v. Jenne, 728 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…e defendant breaches a condition of the bond. We decided in Merdian, however, that if recommitment is ordered, the court must reconsider bail and conditions of release pursuant to Rule 3.131(h) and (b).2 We went a step further in Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842, 843 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), to clarify that a refusal “to impose any conditions of release thereafter constitutes pretrial detention, the need for which the State must prove, § 907.041(4)(f), beyond a reasonable doubt.” Under section 907.041(4)(b) of…1 / 2
-
Houser v. Manning, 719 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…rogeny, see Lepore v. Jenne, 708 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Blackman v. State, 707 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Surdovel v. Jenne, 706 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Dupree v. Cochran, 698 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), is any indication that the Fifth District’s Gardner decision was argued or considered. This is important because the Fourth District has previously cited Gardner with approval. See Gomez v. Hinckley, 473 So. 2d 809, 810 (Fla. 4t…
Previewing 3 of 14 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)
- Gomez v. The Honorable Harry G. Hinckley, Jr., 473 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Carthen v. Richard P. Wille as Sheriff of Palm Beach Cnty., 602 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- State v. Navarro, 603 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Perlman v. Perlman, 679 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Furtney v. State, 679 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)