A.A.R., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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's delinquency adjudication based on violation of a deferred prosecution agreement was reversed because the arrest triggering the violation was subsequently determined to be improper in a related case.
A delinquency adjudication must be reversed when the arrest constituting the alleged violation of a deferred prosecution agreement was improper.
[1] A delinquency adjudication based on violation of a deferred prosecution agreement must be reversed when the arrest constituting the alleged violation was subsequently det…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA.A.R. entered a plea and pass agreement whereby he pled guilty to battery charges and agreed to complete a diversionary program; if completed without…
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 Deferred Prosecution Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
STEVENSON, C.J.
A.A.R. appeals his delinquency adjudication and disposition after the trial court found he violated the terms of a deferred prosecution agreement, referred to locally in the juvenile court as a “plea and pass agreement.” Pursuant to the agreement, A.A.R. pled guilty to the pending charges of battery and battery on a law enforcement officer and was required to complete a diversionary program. If A.A.R. completed the program without being arrested for a new offense, A.A.R. would be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea and the State would dismiss the charges. Before A.A.R. completed the diversionary program, the police arrested A.A.R. for providing a false name. Based on the new arrest, the trial court held A.A.R. violated the agreement and committed him to the Department of Juvenile Justice. While the instant appeal was pending, this court reversed A.A.R.’s conviction for providing a false name and, in so doing, implicitly determined that the arrest was improper. See A.A.R. v. State, 926 So. 2d 463, 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (reversing conviction for “giving a false name to a police officer” where juvenile corrected the false information before he was arrested). In the interest of justice, we reverse A.A.R.’s adjudication of delinquency and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.1
Reversed and Remanded.
GUNTHER and MAY, JJ„ concur. . We note that we cannot fault the trial court for its initial ruling in this case. A.A.R.’s defense counsel failed to challenge the legality of the arrest at the hearing below.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Verner, 926 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)