MVK, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's imposition of maximum-risk residential placement for a minor adjudicated delinquent for grand theft auto who had previously completed two high-risk residential programs, holding that § 985.494(1) mandates such placement regardless of the specific offense.
A child adjudicated delinquent for an act constituting a felony who has completed two different high-risk residential commitment programs must be committed to a maximum-risk residential program under § 985.494(1), Fla. Stat. (2011).
[1] A child adjudicated delinquent for any felony-level offense who has completed two different high-risk residential commitment programs must be committed to a maximum-risk…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMVK, a minor, was adjudicated delinquent for grand theft auto and had previously completed two different high-risk residential programs for other offe…
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 Grand Theft Auto cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal was filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), because Appellant’s counsel was unable to make a good-faith argument that reversible error occurred below. Our review of the record reveals that the trial court properly imposed a maximum-risk residential placement for Appellant, a minor who was adjudicated delinquent for committing grand theft auto and who had previously completed two different high-risk residential programs for other offenses. See § 985.494(1), Fla. Stat. (2011) (“Notwithstanding any other law and regardless of the child’s age, a child who is adjudicated delinquent, or for whom adjudication is withheld, for an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, shall be committed to a maximum-risk residential program if the child has completed two different high-risk residential commitment programs.”). The trial court correctly rejected the arguments raised below that it had to explain its reasons for deviating from the recommendation of the Department of Juvenile Justice pursuant to E.A.R. v. State, 4 So.3d 614 (Fla.2009), and that section 985.494 pertains only to juvenile sexual offenders. Both arguments are refuted by the plain language of the statute.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM.
WOLF, DAVIS, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- E.A.R. v. State, 4 So. 3d 614 (Fla. 2009)