STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
J.D.B., 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.
Florida Supreme Court held that section 924.051(4) does not apply in juvenile delinquency proceedings, but trial judges may reject the Department's community control recommendation without remand if based on specific reasons.
Section 924.051(4) does not apply in juvenile delinquency proceedings, but trial judges have authority to reject the Department's community control recommendation without remanding for an alternative recommendation if specific reasons are stated.
[1] Section 924.051(4), Florida Statutes, does not apply in juvenile delinquency proceedings.
[2] A trial judge may reject the Department of Juvenile Justice's community control recommendation without remanding the case if the judge states specific reasons for the rej…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.D.B. was a juvenile delinquent whose case involved questions about the applicability of section 924.051(4) and the trial judge's authority to reject…
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 Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
SHAW, Justice.
We have for review J.D.B. v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D789, 720 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), wherein the First District Court of Appeal certified the following two questions:
1. DOES SECTION 924.051(4), FLORIDA STATUTES (SUPP.1996), APPLY IN JUVENILE DELINQUENCY PROCEEDINGS?
2. DOES THE TRIAL JUDGE, ACTING AFTER A DISPOSITION HEARING AND BASED ON SPECIFIC REASONS, HAVE AUTHORITY TO REJECT THE DEPARTMENT’S COMMUNITY CONTROL RECOMMENDATION WITHOUT REMANDING THE CASE TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION?
Id. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We have since addressed these questions in State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269 (Fla.1998)(question 1), and State v. E.D.P., No. 92,345, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 696947 (Fla. Oct. 8, 1998)(question 2). We answered the first question in the negative in T.M.B. and the second question in the affirmative in E.D.P. In accordance with our decisions in T.M.B. and E.D.P., we approve J.D.B. on the first issue, quash the district court’s decision on the second issue, and remand this case with directions to reinstate the sentence of the trial court.
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON, J., concur. WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part with an opinion.
PARIENTE, J., dissents with an opinion, in which KOGAN, J., concurs.
WELLS, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons stated in my opinion dissenting to the denial of rehearing in State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269, 271 (Fla.1998), as to the first question.
I concur in the answer to the second question based upon State v. E.D.P., 92,345, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 696947 (Fla. Oct. 8, 1998), and would quash the district court’s decision on this issue.
ANSTEAD, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I agree with the majority’s answer to question one but disagree with the answer to question two.
PARIENTE, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent as to the first certified question for the reasons stated by Justice Wells in his opinion dissenting from the denial of rehearing in State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269, 271 (Fla.1998).
I dissent as to the second certified question for the reasons stated by Justice An-stead in his dissenting opinion in State v. E.D.P., No. 92,345, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 696947 (Fla. Oct. 8, 1998).
KOGAN, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1998)
- J.D.B. v. State, 720 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)