DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, PETITIONER,
v.
JEHOSHAPHAT MITCHELL, RESPONDENT

Fla. 5th DCA | 2003-04-25
No. 5D03-652
SHARP, W. and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
844 So. 2d 694 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2003) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Department of Children and Families sought a writ of prohibition to prevent a trial court from ordering the release of a civilly committed sexually violent predator on furlough to attend a funeral. The court held that Florida Statutes § 394.915(5) plainly prohibits any pretrial release of persons found to be sexually violent predators, including furloughs, and the trial court therefore lacked jurisdiction to grant the furlough order.


Holding

The trial court exceeded its jurisdiction in granting the furlough order because Florida Statutes § 394.915(5) clearly and plainly prohibits pretrial release of persons determined to be sexually violent predators without any exception for furloughs.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court exceeds its jurisdiction by ordering the pretrial release of a person held in custody under the Jimmy Ryce Act when the governing statute prohibits such rel…

[2] A statute that clearly prohibits pretrial release of a sexually violent predator in a secure facility without exception does not permit furlough for attendance at a funer…

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“After a court finds probable cause to believe that the person is a sexually violent predator, the person must be held in custody in a secure facility without opportunity for pretrial release or release during the trial proceedings.”

The controlling statute that plainly prohibits any furlough or pretrial release for sexually violent predators under the Jimmy Ryce Act

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Jehoshaphat Mitchell was convicted of three lewd, lascivious or indecent acts on children in 1994-1995 and imprisoned. Prior to his release, the State…

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.


Opinion of the Court
MONACO, J.

MONACO, J.

The petitioner, Department of Children and Families (“DCF”), sought a writ of prohibition to address the trial court’s order directing DCF to release the respondent, Jehoshaphat Mitchell, on furlough from the Florida Civil Commitment Center to enable him to attend a funeral. DCF further sought an emergency order staying the implementation of the trial court’s order. As respondent was to be released in accordance with the furlough order shortly after the petition was filed, we granted the stay, but directed respondent to file an expedited response.

Although the granting of the stay has now mooted the issue of Mitchell’s furlough, we write because the issue raised is one which is capable of repetition, yet would otherwise avoid review because of its sensitivity to time. See Kight v. Dugger, 574 So. 2d 1066, 1068 (Fla.1990); Lee v. South Florida Water Management Dist., 805 So. 2d 893, 896 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

Mitchell was convicted of committing three lewd, lascivious or indecent acts on children during 1994 and 1995, and was sentenced to state prison. Prior to his release from prison, the State sought to commit Mitchell involuntarily pursuant to the Jimmy Ryce Act, § 394.910, et seq., Florida Statutes. In accordance with the Act, the trial court determined that there was probable cause to believe that Mitchell was a sexually violent predator, and he was ordered held in a secure facility pending trial.

Apparently, Mitchell orally moved for a furlough based on a death in his family, and the trial court granted the motion, and ordered that Mitchell be released to the custody of his sister to attend the funeral. So far as we are able to tell, DCF was not notified of the hearing, and learned of the order only upon being served a copy of it. DCF sought prohibition on the theory that there was no legal authority for the trial court’s furlough order, and that the order, therefore, exceeded the trial court’s jurisdiction.

Section 394.915(5), Florida Statutes, reads as follows:

(5) After a court finds probable cause to believe that the person is a sexually violent predator, the person must be held in custody in a secure facility without opportunity for pretrial release or release during the trial proceedings.

This statute clearly prohibits pretrial release of Mitchell. No exceptions are made within it for furlough. Based on the plain reading of the statute, therefore, we conclude that the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction in entering the furlough order. The issue of the constitutionality of section 394.915(5) was not raised or briefed, either here or in the lower court, and, accordingly, we express no opinion in that regard. As the granting of the stay has rendered the petition for writ of prohibition moot, we decline to issue the writ.

PETITION DENIED AS MOOT.

SHARP, W. and PETERSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. v. Leons, 948 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
    …heless publish this opinion due to the importance of the issue. . Respondent Leon was transported to a forensic hospital on November 20, 2006, but his claim is capable of repetition, yet evading review. See Dep't of Children & Families v. Mitchell, 844 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). .Some motions requested immediate release, placement, and mental health treatment while others sought only one or more forms of relief. In case nos. 4D06-5079, 4D06-5080, 4D06-5081, and 4D06-5082, the court deferred ruling on t…
  • Dep't OF Child. & Families v. Blue, 951 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
    …ugh the transport of Blue and Dames to forensic facilities has now mooted the issues contained in the petitions, we write because the issue raised is capable of repetition yet may otherwise evade review. See Dep’t of Children & Families v. Mitchell, 844 So. 2d 694, 695 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (denying a petition for writ of prohibition as moot but addressing whether the trial court had authority to order the Department to release the committed defendant for a furlough prior to trial). The court did not err in o…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw