A.H.D., 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.
The Fifth District affirmed that a trial court need not request a second juvenile justice recommendation on restrictiveness level after rejecting the Department's community control recommendation, as the statute permits the court to reject the Department's recommendation if it states reasons for deviation.
A trial court is not required to request a second juvenile justice recommendation on restrictiveness level after rejecting the Department's non-commitment recommendation.
[1] A trial court need not request a second juvenile justice recommendation on restrictiveness level after rejecting the Department's non-commitment recommendation, as the st…
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 intelligenceA.H.D., a child, appealed a trial court's disposition in a juvenile case, arguing the court erred by not requesting a juvenile justice recommendation …
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 Restrictiveness Level Recommendation cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, Judge.
A.H.D, a child, asserts that the trial court erred when it did not request a juvenile justice recommendation on a restrictiveness level after rejecting the community control recommendation.
We affirm, and adopt the interpretation of the second district of section 39.052(4)(e)(2), Florida Statutes (1995):
We do not believe the statute requires the court, once it has already rejected the Department’s non-commitment recommendation to then ask the Department for a second recommendation. A request for a second recommendation would seem particularly unnecessary in view of section 39.052(4)(e)(3), Florida Statutes (1995), the next paragraph of the statute, which allows the court to reject the Department’s restrictiveness level recommendation provided that the court state for the record the reasons for its deviation from the Department’s recommendation.
D.L.B. v. State, 707 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. granted, 717 So. 2d 530 (Fla.1998). In doing so, we certify conflict with the first district’s position in B.D.W. v. State, 701 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), approved on other grounds, 717 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1998); R.A.M. v. State, 695 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 1st DCA), approved on other grounds sub nom., State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269 (Fla.1998).
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
D. K. v. State, 717 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…e of a proper objection. See Summers v. State, 684 So. 2d 729 (Fla.1996); State v. Montague, 682 So. 2d 1085 (Fla.1996). AFFIRMED. GRIFFIN, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur. . See J.B. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), A.H.D. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).…
-
A.H.D. v. State, 728 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 1999)…PER CURIAM. We have for review A.H.D. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), based on conflict with B.D.W. v. State, 701 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), approved on other grounds, 717 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1998), and R.A.M. v. State, 695 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), approved on other grounds sub nom., Stat…
Authorities Cited
- State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1998)
- R.A.M. v. State, 695 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- D.L.B. v. State, 707 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
- B.D.W. v. State, 701 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- State v. B.D.W., 717 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1998)
- Rogers v. State, 717 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1998)