STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
S.A.B., A CHILD, RESPONDENT; STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, V. J.C.C., A CHILD, 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 trial courts have inherent authority to seal juvenile court records in the absence of a conflicting rule, even if criminal procedure rules don't generally apply to juvenile cases.
The State appealed orders from lower courts that sealed juvenile court records pursuant to a statute and a criminal procedure rule. The State's challe…
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 Sealing Of Court Records cases and more on FLexlaw
We consolidate these appeals and affirm.1 In both cases, the lower courts sealed juvenile court records upon motions filed pursuant to section 943.059, Florida Statutes (2010) and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.692. The State’s challenge in each case is directed to those portions of the orders that seal juvenile court records. Although statutory authority exists to seal judicial and non-judicial records of a “minor or an adult,” the State contends that, pursuant to Johnson v. State, 336 So.2d 93 (Fla.1976), the control of court records is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the judiciary. Because there is not a juvenile rule of procedure pertaining to the sealing of juvenile court records, the State contends that the lower courts erred in doing so. The State makes no challenge on substantive grounds.2
Although the rules of criminal procedure do not generally pertain to juvenile proceedings, rule 3.692 is expressly applicable to “all” petitions to seal or expunge. Even if rule 3.692 is not applicable, the trial court has the authority to utilize this procedure in the absence of a conflicting rule. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(c)(9)(A)(vii).
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN, SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ., concur.