C. S., A CHILD, PETITIONER,
v.
MARK JACOBY, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE BROWARD REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER, RESPONDENT

Fla. 4th DCA | 2004-12-17
No. 4D04-4536
FARMER, C.J., POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
893 So. 2d 591 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2004)

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.


Holding

The court held that the petitioner's detention was not unlawfully extended by stacking detention periods, as the periods were not consecutive.


Facts & Procedural History

Petitioner C.S. sought habeas corpus relief, challenging successive twenty-one day periods of secure detention for multiple grand theft charges. He ar…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner C.S. filed an emergency petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking to be discharged from secure detention. His challenge is to successive twenty-one day periods of secure detention arising from multiple, separately filed, seemingly unrelated grand theft charges. C.S. contends that his detention is longer than the permitted twenty-one days as set forth in section 985.215(5)(c), Florida Statutes.

We deny relief as this case is unlike the “stacking” cases cited in the petition. R.B. v. Miles, 871 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); W.B.T. v. Esieves, 825 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Those cases hold that the detention statute, section 985.215, does not authorize a trial court to stack twenty-one day detention periods consecutively where multiple acts are charged.

Herein, the trial judge did not require C.S. to complete the twenty-one day secure detention periods associated with the earlier, unrelated, probable cause filings before commencing the twenty-one day period at issue. Rather, the release date was simply extended such that the detention period commenced on the date the instant probable cause affidavit was filed. Accordingly, the petition is denied.

FARMER, C.J., POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw