ADAN JUAREZ, JR., PETITIONER,
v.
RIC L. BRADSHAW, PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF, 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 local administrative order mandates that any capias issued for failure to appear after charges are refiled must provide for an O.R. release.
Adan Juarez failed to appear for arraignment after charges were refiled following an initial 'no file' status. The trial court issued a no-bond capias…
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 Failure To Appear cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Adan Juarez petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus to quash a no-bond capias warrant that was issued for failure to appear at arraignment.
Juarez was arrested for possession of cocaine and a misdemeanor. At first appearances he was released on supervised own recognizance (O.R.). Because the state failed to file formal charges within 30 days, pursuant to an administrative order from the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, the case was treated as a “no file” and Juarez was released from supervised O.R. The state subsequently filed formal charges and sent a notice of arraignment to petitioner’s last known address.
When Juarez did not appear for arraignment, the trial court issued a no-bond bench warrant. Defense counsel pointed out that the local administrative order addresses this situation. The administrative order provides that in the event the state files charges on a case that was “no filed,” the clerk shall send a notice of arraignment to the defendant’s last known address. If the defendant fails to appear at arraignment, the court “may issue a capias for failure to appear, which shall provide for an O.R. release.” Administrative Order No. 4.001-6/01 (IV)(c).
The trial court withdrew the warrant and issued another notice of arraignment at Juarez’s last known address. When he again failed to appear, the court issued another no-bond capias over defense counsel’s objection.
Petitioner’s counsel argues that pursuant to the local administrative order, the capias should be issued with O.R. release. We agree. The administrative order does not give the trial court discretion to order a no-bond capias in this situation. Because petitioner is not in custody, we treat this as a petition for writ of mandamus and grant the petition. The trial court shall withdraw the current no-bond warrant. If the court issues a new capias, pursuant to the local administrative order, it must be with O.R. release.
POLEN, SHAHOOD, and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. Ric L. Bradshaw, 905 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…PER CURIAM. The petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus for his immediate release. The respondent agrees the outcome of this petition is controlled by this court’s recent opinion in Juarez v. Bradshaw, 904 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). We grant the petition, issue the writ, and order the defendant’s immediate release. GUNTHER, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.…
-
Obando v. Ric L. Bradshaw, 920 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…tion and ordering defendant’s release on his own recognizance); Thomas v. Bradshaw, 905 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (granting habeas petition and ordering defendant’s immediate release, finding petition controlled by Juarez ); Juarez v. Bradshaw, 904 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (treating habeas petition as mandamus petition because defendant was not in custody and granting petition, ordering trial court to withdraw the no-bond capias, issued when defendant did not appear for arraignment after state fail…
-
Colon v. Ric L. Bradshaw, 910 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…apsed since his arrest, the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit’s Administrative Order 4.001-6/01IV.C(2), required the trial court to release him on his own recognizance when he failed to appear at the May 12th arraignment. We agree. In Jtiarez v. Bradshaw, 904 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), and Thomas v. Bradshaw, 905 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), this court recognized the mandatory nature of the capias process to be applied under these circumstances and the existing administrative order. Pursuant to the administ…