J.A., 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 has a constitutional right to be present at restitution hearings, and the State must prove a knowing waiver of that right.
Appellant challenged a restitution order entered after a hearing he did not attend. The record also failed to establish that Appellant's crime caused …
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 Burden Of Proof For Waiver cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges the restitution order entered after hearing during which he was not present. We reverse.
“A juvenile has a constitutional right to be present at hearings to determine the imposition and amount of restitution absent a voluntary and intelligent waiver of that right.” I.M. v. State, 955 So.2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The State bears the burden of proving that Appellant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to be present. Thar v. State, 8 So.3d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). Here, indisputably, Appellant did not receive notice of the hearing, nor did he waive his right to be heard.
Appellant also challenges the award of restitution for the value of personal property removed from the stolen vehicle. The record before us fails to establish that Appellant’s crime was the cause of this loss. See L.R.L. v. State, 9 So.3d 714, 715 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (quoting § 985.437(2), Fla. Stat. (2007)).
Accordingly, we reverse the restitution order and remand this cause for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MONACO, C.J., TORPY and JACOBUS, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Windh v. State, 113 So. 3d 150 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…efendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to be present at his restitution hearing, it is error to proceed in his absence.’ ” Thar v. State, 8 So. 3d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (quoting Baker, 979 So. 2d at 455); see also J.A. v. State, 46 So. 3d 1191, 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (noting that “[a] juvenile has a constitutional right to be present at hearings to determine the imposition and amount of restitution absent a voluntary and intelligent waiver of that right” (quoting I.M. v. State, 955 So.…
Authorities Cited
- I.M. v. State, 955 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Thar v. State, 8 So. 3d 1204 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
- L.R.L. v. State, 9 So. 3d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)