R.J.L, A CHILD, 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 court held that a juvenile ordered into secure detention more restrictive than indicated by a risk assessment instrument must be provided with written reasons for that placement.
A juvenile was placed in secure detention without written explanation, despite scoring zero on a risk assessment instrument. This placement was more r…
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 Risk Assessment Instrument cases and more on FLexlaw
R.J.L., a juvenile, petitioned this court for habeas corpus relief. Petitioner asserted, and the State agreed, that the peti*131tioner was entitled to release from secure detention. In light of the parties’ factual assertions, this court agreed and granted the writ by earlier order, with this opinion to follow.
Although no transcript of the proceeding below was provided, it was unrefuted that the juvenile petitioner was first placed in “home detention” in case nos. CJ001722A and CJ001443A, on Oct. 10, 2009. Subsequently, Petitioner was charged with a new law violation in case no. CJ001905A for disorderly conduct, and a detention hearing was held in all three cases on Oct. 22nd. That hearing resulted in secure detention being ordered by the trial court, without any explanation for such detention. The child scored “zero” on the detention risk assessment instrument prepared by the Department of Juvenile Justice. Florida Statute Section 985.255(3)(b) states, “[i]f the court orders a placement more restrictive than indicated by the results of the risk assessment instrument, the court shall state, in writing, clear and convincing reasons for such placement.” No such findings were made in this case, in violation of the statute.
Accordingly, the writ of habeas corpus is granted, with the Petitioner ordered to be immediately released from secure detention and returned to “home detention.” The trial court shall be permitted an opportunity to revisit the issue of detention if there is a basis for doing so. See T.D.S. v. State, 922 So.2d 346, 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).
PETITION GRANTED.
J. GRIFFIN, LAWSON and JACOBUS, JJ. concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State of Fla. & Dep't of Juv. Just. v. S.M., 131 So. 3d 780 (Fla. 2013)…copy of S.M.’s RAI, the Fourth District reasoned that “[bjecause S.M.’s RAI score was zero, the [trial] court erred in placing her in home detention.” Id. at 176. The Fourth District’s decision expressly and directly conflicts with R.J.L. v. State, 22 So. 3d 130 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009), B.L.G. v. State, 928 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), and T.D.S. v. State, 922 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), in which the Fifth District Court of Appeal concluded that a juvenile may be placed in home detention with a risk asse…
Authorities Cited
- White v. State, 922 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- T.D.S. v. State, 922 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)