PATRICK D. SAUNDERS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 court held that a trial court's failure to timely dispose of a violation of probation does not deprive it of jurisdiction.
Patrick Saunders petitioned for a writ of prohibition, alleging the trial court lacked jurisdiction over his violation of probation due to untimely he…
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 Interstate Agreement On Detainers cases and more on FLexlaw
ALTENBERND, Judge.
Patrick Saunders petitions this court for a writ of prohibition alleging that the trial court lacks jurisdiction over the violation of probation pending against him because he has not been timely brought to hearing. Mr. Saunders seeks dismissal of the violation affidavit and the related detainer. We deny the petition with prejudice.
Mr. Saunders was placed on probation for possession of cocaine in 1991. He was subsequently convicted of federal charges and sentenced to federal prison. In 1994, while Mr. Saunders was serving his federal prison sentence, a Florida detainer was placed on him for violating his probation in the cocaine case. Mr. Saunders alleges that he moved the trial court to allow him to resolve the violation of probation in 1994,1997, and 2000, all to no avail.
Athough we are sympathetic to Mr. Saunders’ situation, we deny the petition because we know of no mechanism by which he can force the trial court to timely dispose of the violation of probation nor does the trial court’s failure to have done so deprive it of jurisdiction. Neither the speedy trial rule nor the Interstate Agreement on Detainers applies to a violation of probation. See Gonzalez v. State, 447 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Irby v. State, 427 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Nor does the probation statute afford any relief to a prisoner against whom a detainer has been lodged but who has not been arrested for the violation of probation. See § 948.06(4), Fla. Stat. (2001) (providing that a probationer who has been arrested for a violation of probation shall be given a hearing as soon as practicable).
Petition denied with prejudice.
CASANUEVA and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hall v. State, 117 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…to rule 9.040(c), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, we have considered whether another appellate or extraordinary remedy is available to Appellant and conclude there is none. DeLuca v. State, 82 So. 3d 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Saunders v. State, 837 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. CLARK, MARSTILLER, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.…
-
Norman v. State, 900 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…f an arrest warrant is transmitted and a prisoner is arrested under the authority of that warrant, the prisoner may be entitled to credit because he is being held on both charges. Gethers, 838 So. 2d at 507. As this court noted in Saunders v. State, 837 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), a prisoner who has actually been arrested for a violation of probation is entitled to a hearing “as soon as practicable.” See § 948.06(4), Fla. Stat. (2004). In this case, the State does not concede that Mr. Norman has been arre…
-
McINTOSH v. State, 959 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…petitioner’s motion because the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) does not apply to VOP proceedings. Carchman v. Nash, 473 U.S. 716, 105 S.Ct. 3401, 87 L.Ed.2d 516 (1985). We deny the petition for writ of prohibition. See Saunders v. State, 837 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (denying prohibition [*1247] and noting that no mechanism exists where a defendant can force a court to timely dispose of a VOP, and the failure to do so does not deprive the court of jurisdiction); see also Burgess v. State, 913…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fidel Gonzalez v. State, 447 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Irby v. State OF Mo., 427 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)