JOHN MARK VAUGHAN, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
ADA LYNN VAUGHAN, 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.
A trial judge must consider specific factors before denying an inmate's motion for transport to a civil hearing, and must explore alternatives if transport is denied.
[1] A trial court must consider specific factors, including risk of escape, need for expedited disposition, costs, inconvenience, security, the nature of the hearing, and the…
[2] A trial court may consider alternatives to an inmate's physical presence at a civil proceeding, such as conducting the hearing by telephone or permitting the taking of a…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe husband, an inmate, appealed the denial of his motion for transport to a final dissolution hearing. The trial court denied the motion, conditionin…
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.
John Mark Vaughan, Jr. (husband) appeals from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We discuss only his contention that the trial judge erred in summarily denying his motion for transport to the final hearing.1
Upon receipt of the order setting the final hearing in the contested dissolution proceeding, appellant filed a motion for transport. Without explanation, the trial court denied the motion but indicated that a transport order would be entered if appellant first paid the costs of transportation.2
Before deciding not to have an inmate transported for attendance at a civil proceeding, a trial judge must first consider factors such as risk of escape, the need for expedited dispositions, costs, inconvenience, security precautions, the nature of the hearing, the impact of court ordered transportation on the state and the correctional agencies involved, and any other relevant factors. Waugh v. Waugh, 679 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Little v. Little, 616 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). As an alternative to ordering the inmate’s physical presence at a civil proceeding, the trial court may properly consider conducting the hearing by telephone or permitting the taking of an inmate’s deposition. Conner v. Conner, 590 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
The record before us gives no indication that the trial judge gave any consideration to the required factors before deciding to deny the motion for transport, or whether the trial judge considered any of the alternatives to the husband’s physical presence to ensure that his due process rights were protected. On remand, the trial judge must either order the husband transported to the hearing or utilize any alternatives to his physical presence.
REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
W. SHARP, and HARRIS, JJ„ and ORFINGER, M., Sr. Judge, concur. . Appellant was confined to Bay Correctional Facility in Panama City, Florida.
. Appellant had previously been declared indigent for payment of court costs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. Johnson, 783 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…ocedure outlined in Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.071, as an alternative to requiring that the inmate be transported to the hearing by the state. See, e.g., Gosby v. Third Judicial Circuit, 586 So. 2d 1056 (Fla.1991); Vaughan v. Vaughan, 767 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Waugh v. Waugh, 679 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Conner v. Conner, 590 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). We grant the petition for a writ of mandamus. On remand, the trial court shall set the cause for final hearing, and permit…
-
McArthur Helm v. Foote, 841 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ernative, “the trial court normally should grant a request to hold necessary hearings by telephone.” Johnson v. Johnson, 783 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (citing Gosby v. Third Judicial Circuit, 586 So. 2d 1056 (Fla.1991); Vaughan v. Vaughan, 767 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Waugh; Conner v. Conner, 590 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)). Helm informed the court that he was un [*642] able to participate by telephone without an order directed to the Department of Corrections. On remand, should the trial…
-
Irwin Hicks, Jr. v. Sarping, LLC, 196 So. 3d 1287 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…d for expedited dispositions, costs, inconvenience, security precautions, the nature of the hearing, the impact of court ordered transportation on the state and the correctional agencies involved, and any other relevant factors.” Vaughan v. Vaughan, 767 So. 2d 614, 614 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); see also Brown v. Sheriff of Broward Cty. Jail, 502 So. 2d 88, 89 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). When the trial court determines that the costs of transporting the inmate outweigh the benefits, “the trial court may properly consider…
Authorities Cited
- Dawson-Knapp v. State, 679 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Waugh v. Caren Waugh, 679 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Conner v. Conner, 590 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Little v. Little, 616 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)