R.G., A JUVENILE, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND GEORGE LAFLAM, SUPERINTENDENT, MIAMI DADE JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER, 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 juvenile petitioner sought habeas corpus relief from secure detention ordered by a trial judge without a required risk assessment. The appellate court granted the petition, finding the detention violated Florida's statutory requirements for detention decisions.
The court held that the detention was unlawful because no risk assessment was conducted as statutorily required. Since the power to detain juveniles is entirely statutory, strict compliance with the detention statute is mandatory. The court granted the habeas petition and ordered the juvenile's immediate release.
[1] Habeas corpus is the proper remedy for unlawful juvenile detention that violates statutory risk assessment requirements.
[2] Juvenile detention orders must be based on a risk assessment of the child as required by statute.
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“Habeas corpus is the proper remedy where a juvenile is being detained illegally in violation of the risk assessment requirements and the detention statute.”
Establishes that habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy for unlawful juvenile detention
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceR.G., a juvenile, was ordered into secure detention by Judge Scott Bernstein after being found to have violated probation terms by not attending schoo…
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 Juvenile Detention cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an emergency petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking the release of petitioner R.G. from secure detention pending a juvenile disposition hearing scheduled for June 3, 2002. The petition alleges that the juvenile is being unlawfully detained contrary to sections 985.213(2), 985.215(2) and (9), 985.207(1)(d) and 985.231(1)(a)1.c, Florida Statutes (2000).
Habeas corpus is the proper remedy where a juvenile is being detained illegally in violation of the risk assessment requirements and the detention statute. See A.S. v. Byrd, 777 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (granting a habeas corpus petition as to a home detention order where no risk assessment was prepared by the Department of Juvenile Justice as is required by section 985.213, Florida Statutes (2000)).
In this case, Judge Scott Bernstein ordered that R.G. be held in secure detention after the judge found that R.G. violated the terms of his probation. The trial court specifically stated that R.G. was not being detained based on the charges, but based on the fact that R.G. was not attending school as previously ordered by the court.
No risk assessment of R.G. was made in this case. As the power to place in detention those charged with or found to have committed a delinquent act is entirely statutory, see S.W. v. Woolsey, 673 So. 2d 152, 154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), compliance with the statute is required. See A.S., 777 So. 2d at 1172. Section 985.213(2)(a) is clear in its requirement that all determinations and court orders regarding detention be based on a risk assessment of the child. If, on the other hand, the trial court based its order on the basis of indirect criminal contempt, the juvenile contempt statute, section 985.216(4)(b) provides:
If a child is charged with indirect contempt of court, the court must hold a hearing within 24 hours to determine whether the child committed indirect contempt of a valid court order. At the hearing, the following due process rights must be provided to the child:
1. Right to a copy of the order to show cause alleging facts supporting the contempt charge.
No order to show cause was issued in this case.
This is the sixth emergency habeas corpus petition filed against this same judge since March 26, 2002. In each case, the Attorney General’s Office has conceded error. We would think that the message to this trial court judge should be clear that he, too, must follow the law. We trust that after this opinion, the trial court judge will modify his conduct accordingly.
The petition for habeas corpus is hereby granted and the respondents are ordered to release R.G. from secure detention immediately. The respondents are further directed to place R.G. on home custody with monitoring pending the hearing scheduled for June 3, 2002.
Writ granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A.M.V. v. State, 840 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…and the State’s response, it is plain that the court failed to determine any risk assessment involved in this proceeding. Accordingly, the Petition for Habeas Corpus is granted and the juvenile is ordered discharged instanter. See. R.G. v. State, 817 So. 2d 1019, 1020 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).…
-
D.B. v. State, 848 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…his case. Accordingly we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and direct that D.B. be released from home detention. See K.C. v. Taylor, 696 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); D.G.H. v. Gnat, 682 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); cf. R.G. v. State, 817 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) [*1220] (discussing statute). The court may revisit the issue if there is a basis to do so. Petition granted.…
-
B.M. v. Dobuler, 979 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…is Court. A.K. v. Dobuler, 951 So. 2d 989, 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (noting that although time sensitivity required an earlier grant of ha-beas corpus, a later opinion was necessary to “give some guidance to the juvenile bench and bar”); RG. v. State, 817 So. 2d 1019, 1020 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (“We would think that the message to this trial court judge should be clear that he too must follow the law.”). The detention of juveniles in Florida is governed by chapter 985, Florida Statutes. See ch. 985, pt. V, Fla. St…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 673 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- A.S. v. Byrd, 777 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)