SEAN DUFFY, PETITIONER,
v.
ROBERT CROWDER, SHERIFF OF MARTIN COUNTY, 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 pretrial detention was unauthorized without a proper motion filed by the state under rule 3.132, even if the evidence supported detention.
Sean Duffy was charged with aggravated stalking and denied bond. The State did not file a motion for pretrial detention pursuant to Florida Rule of Cr…
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 Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.132 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Sean Duffy was charged with one count of aggravated stalking, a third degree felony. After a hearing, the trial court denied bond. Duffy asserts, inter alia, that because the State did not file a motion for pretrial detention pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.132, a reasonable bond should have been granted.
We have previously stated:
Rule 3.132(a) allows the state to file a motion seeking pretrial detention at first appearance. When the state does not file such a motion, or the motion is facially insufficient, “the judicial officer shall proceed to determine the conditions of release pursuant to the provisions of rule 3.131(b)(1).” Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.132(a).
Resendes v. Bradshaw, 935 So. 2d 19, 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Denial of bond cannot be considered a “condition of release.” Id; see also Kelly v. State, 939 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Ho v. State, 929 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Nguyen v. State, 925 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Although the transcript of the evidentiary bond hearing contains ample support for the court’s decision to impose pretrial detention on this aggravated stalking charge! because the state did not file a motion for pretrial detention, the court below was not authorized to impose pretrial detention.
We grant the petition insofar as the petitioner has shown his entitlement to a pretrial detention hearing upon a proper motion filed by the state under rule 3.132. The state shall have no more than three business days following the issuance of this opinion to file a motion for pretrial detention. Should the state fail to file such a motion, the trial court shall consider the “conditions of release” pursuant to rule 3.131. Petitioner shall remain in custody pending the determination of the issue of pretrial release or detention according to rules 3.131 and 3.132.
Petition Granted.
FARMER, KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Woods v. State, 987 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…of Criminal Procedure 3.131(b)(1), however, the court must “conduct a hearing to determine pretrial release” unless the State has filed a motion for pretrial detention pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.132. See also Duffy v. Crowder, 960 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Even if the State seeks pretrial detention, article I, section 14, still requires the court to permit pretrial release upon reasonable conditions unless no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of…
-
Rodriguez v. Jenne, 963 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…did not have authority to deny petitioner bond and instead was required to consider conditions of release pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.131(b)(1). Resendes v. Bradshaw, 935 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); see also Duffy v. Crowder, 960 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and remand for a hearing to determine conditions of pretrial release or for a pretrial detention hearing if the state files a proper motion. The trial court shall ho…
-
In re Amendments TO Fla. Rule OF Crim. Procedure 3.132, 19 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 2009)…mpromise procedure is, in effect, consistent with the practice by appellate courts that have, even under the current rule, permitted belated motions by the State, even staying the release so the court could consider the motion. See Duffy v. Crowder, 960 So. 2d 909, 909-10 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Juste v. State, 946 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). We thus adopt an amendment to subdivision (a) (Motion Filed at First Appearance) of rule 3.132 (Pretrial Detention) to provide that where the State has not filed a mot…
Authorities Cited
- Viet HO v. State, 929 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Resendes v. Ric L. Bradshaw, 935 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Qui Vinh Phuoc Nguyen v. State, 925 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Acres v. State, 925 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Brown v. State, 939 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Corrie Kelly v. State, 939 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)