STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PETITIONER,
v.
SHANNON COLEMAN, 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.
The Florida Department of Corrections challenged a trial court order allowing a sex offender to serve community control in Virginia instead of Florida. The appellate court quashed the order, holding that Florida law requires any such relocation to be expressly contingent on approval from the receiving state's interstate compact authority, which the trial court's order failed to include.
A trial court may not modify a sex offender's community control conditions to allow relocation to another state unless the modification order expressly stipulates that relocation is contingent upon approval of the receiving state's interstate compact authority, as mandated by section 948.03(6), Florida Statutes.
[1] A sentencing court may impose a condition allowing an offender convicted of certain sex offenses to reside in another state only if the order stipulates that it is contin…
[2] A trial court errs by modifying the conditions of community control to allow relocation to another state without making the relocation contingent upon the approval of the…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the sentencing court may only impose a condition of supervision allowing an offender convicted of s. 794.011, s. 800.Oh, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0145, to reside in another state, if the order stipulates that it is contingent upon the approval of the receiving state interstate compact authority”
The statute's unambiguous requirement that out-of-state relocation must be expressly contingent on receiving state approval
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondent Shannon Coleman was convicted of violations of section 800.04 (sex offenses) and sentenced to community control followed by probation. Four…
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 Petition For Writ Of Prohibition cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, J.
Respondent was convicted of several violations of section 800.04 and sentenced to community control and subsequent probation. Four days after the sentence was imposed, the trial court granted his motion to correct sentence to allow him to serve the community control in Virginia, there to reside with his mother. The trial court specified that petitioner (DOC) was to continue to supervise respondent’s community control from the state of Florida, simply notifying Virginia authorities of his new residence there. From that order, DOC has filed the present petition for a writ of prohibition, which we treat as alternatively seeking relief by writ of certiorari.
We grant certiorari1 and quash the order modifying the sentence to allow re spondent to take up residence with his mother in Virginia under Florida imposed community control. Section 948.03(6) unambiguously provides:
“The enumeration of specific kinds of terms and conditions shall not prevent the court from adding thereto such other or others as it considers proper. However, the sentencing court may only impose a condition of supervision allowing an offender convicted of s. 794.011, s. 800.Oh, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0145, to reside in another state, if the order stipulates that it is contingent upon the approval of the receiving state interstate compact authority.”
See § 948.03(6), Fla. Stat. (1999)[emphasis supplied].
Because the order does not state that relocation of respondent’s residence is contingent on the approval of the proper Virginia authorities, the change in the conditions of community control to allow the relocation was error. Moreover the change significantly affects the ability of DOC to perform its statutory duty to supervise this community controllee in a way for which the agency would have no remedy except by certiorari. On return of this case, the trial court shall be free to permit a relocation of residency to Virginia upon compliance with section 948.03(6). Because we have expedited this case, any motion for rehearing shall be filed within 7 days of the release of this opinion.
WARNER, C.J., and TAYLOR, J., concur. . Prohibition is not a proper remedy because it is prospective only and may not be used as a mode of review of judicial action already undertaken. Lorenzo v. Murphy, 159 Fla. 639, 32 So. 2d 421 (1947) (purpose of prohibition is to prevent tribunal from acting in excess of its power, while certiorari is to remedy consequences of such action).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moore v. Basil Proctor, 795 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…t, pursuant to rule 2-101 of the Interstate Compact for the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers, and requested the respondent’s removal from the state of New York. We grant the petition and quash the order. See State, Dep’t of Corr. v. Coleman, 766 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). The respondent indicates that the New York authorities have since agreed to accept probation supervision over him. We disagree with his contention that such action renders the instant petition moot, as it continues to allow hi…
-
Moore v. Nelson, 830 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…rnatives of the State of New York rejected the department’s request and requested the respondent’s removal from the state of New York. Id. Thus, this court granted the petition and quashed the trial court’s order. Id.; see Dep’t of Corr. v. Coleman, 766 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). In this case, the offenses resulting in respondent’s plea were committed in 1992; thus, respondent was sentenced under section 794.041(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1991). That section was repealed in 1993 and simultaneously re-enac…
Authorities Cited
- Lorenzo v. Honorable S. J. Murphy, 159 Fla. 639 (Fla. 1947)
- Frier v. State, 159 Fla. 639 (Fla. 1947)