JOSEPH R. FRANCIS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 appellate court denied a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, treating it as a petition for writ of certiorari. The court found it lacked jurisdiction for habeas corpus because the petitioner was detained in another state. The court also affirmed the lower court's revocation of pretrial release, holding that the commission of new offenses justified revocation without considering alternative conditions.
The commission of new criminal offenses is a sufficient basis for revoking pretrial release, and the court is not required to reconsider alternative conditions in such circumstances. The finding that the new offenses impugned the integrity of the judicial process was a permissible basis for revocation.
[1] A court lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus when the petitioner is not within the court's territorial jurisdiction and is not detained on the authority of…
[2] A petition for a writ of habeas corpus may be treated as a petition for a writ of certiorari.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Petitioner is not within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and not detained on authority of an order issued by a court under our supervisory jurisdiction. Therefore we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus.”
Establishes the court's lack of jurisdiction for a writ of habeas corpus.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoseph R. Francis, facing charges in Florida and income tax evasion charges in Nevada, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the revocati…
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 Writ Of Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Joseph R. Francis petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging an order of the Circuit Court for Bay County which revoked his pretrial release in a 2003 criminal matter pending there. Petitioner, however, is detained in Nevada by order of a United States District Judge who is presiding over charges of income tax evasion against Francis. Petitioner is not within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and not detained on authority of an order issued by a court under our supervisory jurisdiction.
Therefore we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus. Alachua Reg’l Juvenile Det. Ctr. v. T.O., 684 So. 2d 814 (Fla.1996); Murray v. Regier, 872 So. 2d 217 (Fla.2002). The petition for writ of habeas corpus will be treated as seeking a writ of certiorari. Fla. R.App. P. 9.040(c).
Petitioner’s pretrial release was revoked because the court found probable cause that Francis, who faces new charges in Bay County of introduction of contraband into a correctional facility, had violated the terms of his release by committing new law violations. This, according to the circuit court, impugned the integrity of the judicial process and justified revocation of the bond in the 2003 case.
Petitioner argues that the circuit court was required to reconsider conditions which would protect the community from physical harm and assure his presence at trial and that pretrial detention was permissible only if no such conditions were adequate.
The state argues, and we agree, that such considerations are not required where the violation of pretrial release is commission of another criminal offense. The finding of the circuit court that the commission of the new offenses impugned the integrity of the judicial process was a permissible basis for revocation of pretrial release. Parker v. State, 843 So. 2d 871, 878 (Fla.2003); see also Alexander v. Judd, 930 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Perry v. State, 842 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).
PETITION DENIED.
BROWNING, C.J., DAVIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Alachua Reg'l Juv. Detention Ctr. v. T.O., 684 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 1996)
- Murray v. Regier, 872 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 2002)
- Cephas v. Mark J. Letzter, M.D., 843 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2003)
- Perry v. State, 842 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
- Parker v. State, 843 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2003)
- Alexander v. Grady Judd, 930 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)