H.H., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Trial court properly imposed level 8 restriction without seeking further Department recommendation after rejecting the Department's level 6 recommendation, as the statutory requirement to resubmit applies only when departing from community control recommendations, not from other restrictiveness levels.
When a trial court rejects a Department of Juvenile Justice recommendation of a specific restrictiveness level and imposes a higher level while stating its reasons on the record, no further Department recommendation is required.
[1] When a trial court rejects a Department of Juvenile Justice recommendation of a specific restrictiveness level and imposes a different level while stating reasons on the…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department of Juvenile Justice recommended level 6 restriction for the appellant, a juvenile offender. The trial court rejected this recommendatio…
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 Appellate Review Of Trial Court Discretion cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge.
Appellant contends that the trial court erred in not seeking a further recommendation from the Department of Juvenile Justice (Department) after rejecting the Department’s recommendation of level 6 restriction, and instead committing appellant to a level 8 restriction, after stating on the record its reasons for doing so. Appellant relies on E.D.P. v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D348, — So. 2d - (Fla. 1st DCA Jan. 27, 1998); J.P.M. v. State, 688 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) and S.R. v. State, 683 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). In the cited cases the first district has taken the view that a recommendation of community control is not a “restrictiveness level,” so that a trial court’s determination not to follow that recommendation requires a resubmission to the Department for a recommended restrictiveness level. Relying on the language ' of See. 39.052(4)(e)3, Fla. Stat. (1995), the second district disagrees with the first, and holds that a recommendation of community control is a “restriction,” thus no further submission to the Department is required when the trial court determines to depart from the recommended sanction. See, D.L.B. v. State, 707 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).
These cases are distinguishable because here the Department recommended a restrictiveness level 6 and the court departed to level 8. Thus, whether community control is or is not a restrictiveness level plays no part in our decision here. Under the facts of this ease, no further recommendation from the Department was required.
AFFIRMED.
GOSHORN, J., concurs.
DAUKSCH, J., concurs in conclusion only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.L.F. v. State, 717 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…recommended level 6 disposition to a level 8 commitment, without first seeking another recommendation from the Department of Juvenile Justice, relying on E.D.P. v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D348 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan.27, 1998). rev. granted, No. 92,345, 712 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. May 19, 1998); J.P.M. v. State, 688 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); S.R. v. State, 683 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). We have recently rejected this argument in H.H. v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1499, 712 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA June 19, 19…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of S.R. v. State, 683 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- D.L.B. v. State, 707 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
- J.P.M. v. State, 688 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Reeder v. State, 688 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)