J.A.L., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 an indefinite term of community control and a single disposition order for multiple offenses are erroneous.
J.A.L. was adjudicated delinquent for obstructing an officer and violating a curfew ordinance. The trial court entered a single disposition order plac…
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 Obstructing an Officer cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
J.A.L. appeals his June 21, 1999, adjudication of delinquency for obstructing an officer without violence and with violating the Tampa Juvenile Curfew Ordinance. We affirm the adjudications without further comment, but reverse the single disposition order and remand for further proceedings.
The offense of obstructing an officer without violence is a first-degree misdemeanor, punishable by a term of imprisonment not to exceed one year. See §§ 843.02, Fla. Stat. (1997), 775.082(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). The violation of the Tampa Juvenile Curfew Ordinance is a second-degree misdemeanor punishable by a term of imprisonment not to exceed sixty days. See § 775.082(4)(b), Fla. Stat. (1997). The trial court entered a single order adjudicating sixteen-year old J.A.L. guilty of the two offenses and placed him on community control for an indefinite period of time.
On appeal, J.A.L. argued, and the State conceded, that the trial court’s order improperly failed to set forth the duration of the community control. The indefinite term of community control was erroneous because the order could have been construed to extend commitment beyond the statutory maximum for each offense. See R.P. v. State, 760 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); A.F. v. State, 718 So. 2d 260, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Further, we note that the court erred by failing to enter separate orders of disposition as to each offense. See K.D. v. State, 779 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); A.F., 718 So. 2d at 263.
Accordingly, we affirm the adjudications of guilt. We reverse the single disposition order and remand for the trial court to enter a separate disposition order for each offense with definite terms of community control which do not exceed the statutory máximums for the offense.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
BLUE, A.C.J., and FULMER J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
L.W.G. v. State, 785 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…rt adjudicates a juvenile delinquent for more than one offense, separate disposition orders must be entered for each adjudicated offense in order to prevent confusion. See B.H. v. State, 721 So. 2d 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); see also J.A.L. v. State, 778 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); J.P.C. v. State, 773 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Moreover, language committing a juvenile for an indeterminate period of time no longer than a specific birthday or the maximum term of imprisonment is error because such langua…
-
I.B. v. State, 816 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…imprisonment is error because such language could allow the sentence to be construed as running longer than the statutory maximum provided for the particular offense." L.W.G. v. State, 785 So. 2d 696, 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (citing J.A.L. v. State, 778 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); R.P. v. State, 695 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); M.S. v. State, 675 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)). These cases suggest that the trial court should designate that the commitment should be for the shorter period. Since we find…
Authorities Cited
- K.D. v. State, 779 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- A. F. v. State, 718 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- William Earl Banks v. Singletary, 718 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Miguel v. City OF Miami, 760 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Donaldson v. State, 760 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)