CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, APPELLANT,
v.
ANDREW CAVERLY, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1999-02-12
No. 98-2532
WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
727 So. 2d 307 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1999) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that section 960.293(2)(b), Fla.Stat., does not apply to juvenile detention in connection with a delinquency order under chapter 39, Fla.Stat.


Facts & Procedural History

The City of Jacksonville sought to recover per diem charges for juvenile detention costs under a statute intended for convicted offenders. The trial c…

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.


Opinion of the Court
ALLEN, J.

ALLEN, J.

The City of Jacksonville appeals an.order dismissing a claim for liquidated damages under section 9601293(2)(b), Fla.Stat. This statute permits the state and local subdivisions to recover a per diem charge for the incarceration and correctional costs for a “convicted offender.”- The statute further refers to “conviction ... for an offense,” and “the convicted offender’s sentence....” In dismissing the City’s claim the court ruled that section 960.293(2)(b) does not apply to juvenile detention in connection with a delin quency order under chapter 39, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994).

Because the terminology used in section 960.293(2)(b), with regard to convictions and convicted offenders, does not pertain in the juvenile context under chapter 39, we likewise conclude that the statute does not apply to such juvenile detention, even when the delinquency adjudication is predicated on a violation of criminal law. The section 960.291(2) and (3), Fla.Stat., definitions of “conviction” and “convicted offender” likewise use terminology which doés not pertain in the chapter 39 juvenile context. And section 39.053(4), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994), specifies (apart from limited exceptions not involved here) that

... an adjudication of delinquency by a court with respect to any child who has committed a delinquent act or violation of law shall not be deemed a conviction....

The appealed order is therefore affirmed.

WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. J.M., 824 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 2002)
    …nt as a habitual offender. See Cotton v. State, 652 So. 2d 1260, 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Gahley v. State, 605 So. 2d 1309, 1310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Shook v. State, 603 So. 2d 617, 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); see also City of Jacksonville v. Caverly, 727 So. 2d 307, 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding statute that permitted state and local subdivisions to recover per diem charges for incarceration from convicted offenders did not allow for recovery from juveniles in detention based on an adjudication of delinquen…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw