ARTHUR BLAIR, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA AND RIC L. BRADSHAW, PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF, RESPONDENTS
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 cannot be ordered without findings that the failure to appear was willful and that no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community or assure the accused's presence at trial.
[1] Pretrial detention may not be ordered based on a failure to appear unless the court finds that the failure to appear was willful.
[2] A pretrial detention order must contain findings of fact and conclusions of law showing that the constitutional and statutory criteria for pretrial detention are met.
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 intelligenceArthur Blair was held without bond for a felony DUI charge after failing to appear for a court date, despite not receiving notice of the charge. The t…
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 Bond Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
The trial court ordered petitioner, Arthur Blair, held without bond after he failed to appear for a court date on a felony DUI charge. Blah* had never been arrested on the felony charge and he did not receive notice of the court date. Blair had been arrested for misdemeanor DUI and appeared at a scheduled court date for that charge. At that time, he was advised that the court appearance had been can-celled and that the misdemeanor case had been nolle prossed. Unbeknownst to Blair, the state had filed an information charging felony DUI, but the uncontested evidence at the bond hearing showed that Blair did not receive notice of the felony charge.
The trial court did not find the failure to appear to be willful. The record is devoid of evidence to suggest that petitioner willfully failed to appear. Pretrial detention may not be ordered based on a failure to appear unless the court finds that the failure to appear was willful. See Lee v. State, 956 So.2d 1292 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Johnson v. Jenne, 913 So.2d 740 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Winters v. Jenne, 765 So.2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Further, the trial court improperly ordered pretrial detention without finding that “no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons, assure the presence of the accused at trial, or assure the integrity of the judicial process.” Art. I, § 14, Fla. Const. A pretrial detention order must contain findings of fact and conclusions of law showing that the constitutional and statutory criteria for pretrial detention are met. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.132(c)(2); § 907.041(4)(i), Fla. Stat. (2008).
This court’s decision in Bradshaw v. Jenne, 754 So.2d 109, 110-11 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), predates the Florida Supreme *760Court’s decision in State v. Paul, 783 So.2d 1042 (Fla.2001). In Paid, the supreme court agreed with Judge Taylor’s dissent in Bradshaiv. See id. at 1049 n. 11. Pretrial detention based on a violation of a bond condition, other than the commission of a new offense while on pretrial release, is subject to the requirements of section 907.041, Florida Statutes. See § 907.041(4)(c)7, Fla. Stat. (2008) (requiring a court ordering pretrial detention based on a violation of a pretrial release condition to find that “no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons or assure the presence of the accused at trial”). Cf. § 903.0471, Fla. Stat. (2008) (permitting court to order pretrial detention when it finds probable cause to believe defendant committed a new offense while on pretrial release); Parker v. State, 843 So.2d 871, 878 (Fla.2003) (finding section 903.0471 constitutional and suggesting that an Article I, section 14 finding is not required when probable cause is found that defendant committed a new offense while on pretrial release).
Although a trial court has discretion in setting reasonable pretrial release conditions, a trial court’s authority to order pretrial detention is circumscribed by the state constitution and relevant statutes. Paul makes clear that these requirements apply even where a defendant has violated pretrial release conditions, such as through a failure to appear. 783 So.2d at 1051. Paul effectively overruled the majority’s analysis in Bradshaiv, which permitted a court to order pretrial detention following a finding of a willful failure to appear without also finding that the constitutional and statutory criteria for pretrial detention were met.
The court in Ricks v. State, 961 So.2d 1093, 1093-94 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007), appears to have relied on pre-Paul cases to reach the same conclusion as Bradshaw, that a court may order pretrial detention based solely on a finding of a willful failure to ajapear “without determining whether conditions of release are appropriate.” Id. (citing Wilson v. State, 669 So.2d 312, 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)). We certify conflict with this aspect of Ricks.
' The petition for writ of habeas corpus is granted and the trial court shall hold a bond hearing and release the defendant on reasonable conditions unless the court determines that the failure to appear was willful and that “no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons, assure the presence of the accused at trial, or assure the integrity of the judicial process.” Art. I, § 14, Fla. Const.; § 907.041(4)(c)7, Fla. Stat. (2008); Paul, 783 So.2d at 1042.1
POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Blair, 39 So. 3d 1190 (Fla. 2010)…[*1191] PER CURIAM. This case is before the Court for review of the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Blair v. State, 15 So. 3d 758 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). The district court certified that its decision is in direct conflict with the decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Ricks v. State, 961 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007), as to whether a trial court may order pretrial…
-
Rayvon L. Boatman v. State, 77 So. 3d 1242 (Fla. 2011)…Greenwood v. State, 51 So. 3d 1278, 1279 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) ("A petition for writ of habeas corpus in the appellate court is the appropriate way to challenge a trial court’s ruling on the conditions of pretrial release.”); see, e.g., Blair v. State, 15 So. 3d 758, 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) ("The petition for writ of habe-as corpus is granted and the trial court shall hold a bond hearing and release the defendant on reasonable conditions unless the court determines that the failure to appear was willful and tha…
-
Williams v. State, 59 So. 3d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…itions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons or assure the presence of the accused at trial,” a requirement of pretrial detention under section 907.041(4)(c)7., Florida Statutes (2010). Blair v. State, 15 So. 3d 758, 759 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009), approved, 39 So. 3d 1190 (Fla.2010). Even if the trial court meant to indicate that it found the nonappearance to be willful, the further findings still were necessary. Bannister v. Lamberti, 32 So. 3d 745 (Fla. 4th DCA 201…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- State v. Paul, 783 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2001)
- Cephas v. Mark J. Letzter, M.D., 843 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2003)
- Parker v. State, 843 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2003)
- Sundale, Ltd. v. Williams Paving Co., Inc., 913 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Octavia LEE v. State, 956 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Bradshaw v. Jenne, 754 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Davis v. State, 669 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Tausha L. Wilson v. State, 669 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Lachandra Winters v. Jenne, 765 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Peters v. Biagetti, 765 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)