STEVEN SCHWARTZ, PETITIONER,
v.
ROBERT NEUMANN, SHERIFF, PALM BEACH COUNTY, AND HONORABLE RICHARD OFTEDAL, CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE, FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, RESPONDENTS
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 court held that a pretrial detention order must be vacated if the state fails to prove the existence of at least one of the four circumstances listed in section 907.041(4)(b).
Petitioner sought habeas corpus relief from a pretrial detention order. The trial court granted detention based on breach of release conditions and ri…
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 Deferred Prosecution Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner Steven Schwartz filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, seeking relief from a trial court order granting the state’s motion for pretrial detention. The trial court granted the motion based on its findings (1) that Petitioner had breached conditions of his release under a pretrial intervention program deferred prosecution agreement, as well as the conditions of a restraining order issued in accordance with the agreement; and (2) that there were no conditions of release sufficient to protect the community from the risk of physical harm. However, the respondent concedes that the state failed to prove the existence of at least one of the four circumstances listed in section 907.041(4)(b). Absent such proof, we must vacate the pretrial detention order. See Paul v. Jenne, 728 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). However, the trial court’s findings support further proceedings pursuant to rule 3.131(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and section 903.046, Florida Statutes (1997) to determine petitioner’s entitlement to pretrial release. We also note that there remains pending a psychiatric evaluation and an unfinished Baker Act proceeding that may bear upon the need for confinement in a mental health facility for appropriate treatment.
Accordingly, we grant habeas corpus and we vacate the pretrial detention order. We remand this cause to the trial court to promptly conduct further proceedings to determine petitioner’s entitlement to pretrial release and/or for further proceedings pursuant to the Baker Act.
Clerk is directed to issue mandate concurrently with this opinion.
DELL, WARNER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
PER CURIAM.
We deny respondent’s motion for rehearing. However, we substitute the following opinion for that issued by this court on March 31,1999.
Petitioner Steven Schwartz filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, seeking relief from a trial court order granting the state’s motion for pretrial detention. The trial court granted the motion based on its findings (1) that Petitioner had breached conditions of his release under a pretrial intervention program deferred prosecution agreement, as well as the conditions of a restraining order issued in accordance with the agreement; and (2) that there were no conditions of release sufficient to protect the community from the risk of physical harm. However, the state failed to prove the existence of at least one of the four circumstances listed in section 907.041(4)(b). Absent such proof, we must vacate the pretrial detention order. See Paul v. Jenne, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D581, 728 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). However, the trial court’s findings support further proceedings pur suant to rule 3.131(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and section 903.046, Florida Statutes (1997) to determine petitioner’s entitlement to pretrial release. We also note that there remains pending a psychiatric evaluation and an unfinished Baker Act proceeding that may bear upon the need for confinement in a mental health facility for appropriate treatment.
Accordingly, we grant habeas corpus and we vacate the pretrial detention order. We remand this cause to the trial court to promptly conduct further proceedings to determine petitioner’s entitlement to pretrial release and/or for further proceedings pursuant to the Baker Act.
Clerk is directed to issue mandate concurrently with this opinion.
DELL, WARNER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Paul, 783 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2001)…or her constitutionally guaranteed right to bail altogether; a refusal to readmit a defendant to any bail at all must be subject to the limitations of the pretrial detention statute. 728 So. 2d at 1171 (emphasis supplied); see Schwartz v. Neumann, 731 So. 2d 746, 747 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (pretrial detention is inappropriate after defendant breaches conditions of release, unless the State proves at least one of the four circumstances listed in section 907.041(4)(b)); Rix v. Jenne, 728 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA…
-
Bush v. State, 74 So. 3d 130 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…review of trial court orders pertaining to bail and pretrial release. Among other kinds of orders within this general class, an order detaining a defendant under the pretrial detention statute is reviewable by habeas corpus. See Schwartz v. Neumann, 731 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). To properly address the issues presented by the petition in this case we must consider the provisions of two rules. Rule 3.131(d)(2) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that the state may seek modification of ba…
-
Schofield v. Grady C. Judd, 268 So. 3d 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Metzger v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Paul v. Jenne, 728 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)