STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
J.V.W., A CHILD, 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 court held that the juvenile court was required to suspend the minor's driver's license pursuant to section 322.056, Florida Statutes, even when a plea of no contest was entered and adjudication was withheld.
A minor was charged with possession of alcohol by a minor. The juvenile court accepted a plea of no contest, withheld adjudication, and ordered the mi…
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 No Contest Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
The State appeals the juvenile court’s failure to order the suspension of the driver’s license of J.V.W., pursuant to section 322.056, Florida Statutes (1997). We agree that the suspension was mandatory and reverse.
A petition charged J.V.W. with violating section 562.111, Florida Statutes (1997), which prohibits possession of alcoholic beverages by minors. On April 16, 1998, the juvenile court accepted J.V.W.’s plea of no contest, withheld adjudication, and direct ed J.V.W. to attend Juvenile Arbitration Drug Court. At that time, the State requested that a mandatory suspension of J.V.W.’s driver’s license be imposed. The juvenile court opined that if a plea of no contest rather than guilty was entered, the decision of whether to suspend the minor’s driver’s license was discretionary.
The juvenile court’s ruling, while done in good faith, was erroneous. The acceptance of the no contest plea constituted a finding of delinquency. See State v. R.N., 597 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). The withholding of adjudication was not the equivalent of a not guilty finding. The requirements of section 322.056(1) are mandatory, even when a no contest plea has been entered and adjudication has been withheld. See id. at 863; see also State v. M.D., 706 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).
Accordingly, we reverse the disposition order and remand with directions that J.V.W.’s driver’s license be suspended in accordance with the requirements of section 322.056.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
FULMER, A.C.J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., (Senior) Judge, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. S.S., 8 So. 3d 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…is entered, adjudication is withheld, and the underlying offense is one enumerated under the statute — as is section 893.13. See State v. C.C.S., 779 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); State v. R.D.H., 779 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); State v. J.V.W., 739 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). S.S. concedes that suspension is mandatory but argues that we should have dismissed the State’s appeal. We disagree. The State filed a premature notice of appeal after the trial court’s oral pronouncement of judgment but before…
-
State v. R.D.H., 779 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…Arbitration Drug Court Program. This court has held that even when the trial court accepts a no contest plea and withholds adjudication, section 322.056(1) mandates that the trial court suspend the juvenile’s driver’s license. See State v. J.V.W., 739 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Thus, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for the trial court to suspend R.D.H.’s license in accordance with the requirements of section 322.056(1). Reversed and remanded. NORTHCUTT and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.…
-
State v. C.C.S., 779 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…or any treatment or counseling. This court has held that even when the trial court accepts a no contest plea and withholds adjudication, section 322.056(1) mandates that the trial court suspend the juvenile’s driver’s license. See State v. J.V.W., 739 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Thus, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for the trial court to suspend C.C.S.’s lipense in accordance with the requirements of section 322.056(1). Reversed and remanded. NORTHCUTT and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. R.N., 597 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- N.E.H. v. State, 706 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- State v. M.D., 706 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)