YOLANDA MONTGOMERY, PETITIONER,
v.
KEN JENNE, AS SHERIFF OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
A trial court cannot sua sponte increase a defendant's bond without notice or a showing of good cause and new information not available to the committing magistrate.
The trial court, after a hearing on the petitioner's motion to reduce bond, sua sponte increased her bond after viewing photographs of the victim's in…
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 Probable Cause Affidavit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
At a hearing on Petitioner’s motion to reduce bond, the trial court sua sponte increased her bond, doing so after viewing photographs of the victim’s injuries, which had been detailed in the probable cause affidavit. The magistrate had considered the affidavit, but not the photographs, in setting Petitioner’s initial bond. We grant her petition for writ of habeas corpus and quash that portion of the order increasing her bond.
A trial court does not have the authority to increase bond on its own motion. See Cousino v. Jenne, 717 So. 2d 599, 600 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Bowers v. Jenne, 710 So. 2d 681, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Flemming v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Athough the issue of Petitioner’s bond had been raised by her motion to reduce it, Petitioner was given no notice of any application to increase it. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.131(d)(2) (“The state may apply for modification of bail by showing good cause and with at least 3 hours’ notice to the attorney for the defendant.”).
Second, increasing a defendant’s bond is improper unless the state shows that the increase is warranted by information not available to the committing magistrate who set the initial bond. See Bowers; Santos v. Garrison, 691 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186, 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Sikes v. McMillian, 564 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Kelsey v. McMillan, 560 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Here, Petitioner’s bond was increased based on the same information that was presented to the magistrate who set her initial bond, namely, that she broke the victim’s ribs. The photographs that the court reviewed prior to increasing bond were not shown to contain additional information not available to the committing magistrate, but only the same information in a different form.
Accordingly, the petition is granted and the order increasing bond is quashed.
GUNTHER, SHAHOOD and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Kelsey v. McMILLAN, 560 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Sikes v. McMILLIAN, 564 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Santos v. Honorable Edward Garrison, 691 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Bowers v. Jenne, 710 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- State v. Girard, 694 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Thetus Flemming v. Cochran, 694 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Cousino v. Jenne, 717 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)