J.B., A CHILD, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 approved the Fifth District's decision that a trial judge may reject the Department of Juvenile Justice's community control recommendation without remanding the case, consistent with State v. E.D.P.
A trial judge, acting after a disposition hearing and based on specific reasons, has authority to reject the Department of Juvenile Justice's community control recommendation without remanding the case for an alternative recommendation.
[1] A trial judge may reject a juvenile justice department's community control recommendation after a disposition hearing based on specific reasons without remanding the case…
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 intelligenceJ.B., a child, appealed a juvenile disposition decision, raising an issue regarding judicial authority to reject the Department of Juvenile Justice's …
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.
PER CURIAM.
We have for review J.B. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), based on conflict with E.D.P. v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D348, 728 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), quashed, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S524, 724 So. 2d 1144 (Fla.1998), and other cases.1 We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We approve J.B.
The issue raised in the instant conflict is controlled by our recent decision in State v. E.D.P., 23 Fla. L. Weekly S524, 724 So. 2d 1144 (Fla.1998)(reviewing the conflict case cited above), wherein the First District certified the following question of great public importance:
DOES THE TRIAL JUDGE, ACTING AFTER A DISPOSITION HEARING AND BASED ON SPECIFIC REASONS, HAVE AUTHORITY TO REJECT THE DEPARTMENT [OF JUVENILE JUSTICEj’S COMMUNITY CONTROL RECOMMENDATION WITHOUT REMANDING THE CASE TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION?
We answered the question in the affirmative and quashed the First District’s opinion. Id.
In accordance with our decision in E.D.P., we approve J.B. On October 8, 1998, this Court disapproved R.A.M. and S.R. to the extent they are inconsistent with E.D.P. See D.L.B. v. State, 720 So. 2d 202 (Fla.1998).
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs with an opinion, in which ANSTEAD, J., concurs.
. 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), and S.R. v. State, 683 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
PARIENTE, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the result because we are bound by our decision in State v. E.D.P., 23 Fla. L. Weekly S524, 724 So. 2d 1144 (Fla.1998). However, I continue to agree with Justice Anstead’s well-reasoned dissent in E.D.P. ANSTEAD, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. T.M.B., 716 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1998)
- In the Interest of S.R. v. State, 683 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- R.A.M. v. State, 695 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- State v. E.D.P., 724 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 1998)
- D.L.B. v. State, 720 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 1998)
- J.B. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- E.D.P. v. State, 728 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Alcott v. State, 728 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)