BRUCE D. FULLER, 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.
Fuller petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus after the trial court revoked his pretrial release without notice or hearing following an alleged SCRAM violation. The court held that while a defendant's breach of bond conditions forfeits the right to release under those terms, it does not forfeit the constitutional right to bail, and the trial court must provide notice and an opportunity to be heard before imposing pretrial detention.
The court held that although breaching a condition of bond forfeits the right to continued release under those specific terms, it does not forfeit the constitutional right to bail altogether. The trial court must provide notice and an opportunity to be heard before imposing pretrial detention, and must consider whether detention is warranted under Florida's pretrial detention statute.
[1] A defendant, initially granted pretrial release, is entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before pretrial release may be revoked.
[2] Breaching a condition of a pretrial release bond does not automatically forfeit a defendant's constitutional right to bail.
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 intelligence“Although breaching a condition of the bond originally set by the court forfeits a defendant's right to continued release under the terms of that bond, it does not forfeit the constitutional right to bail altogether.”
Establishes the core holding that bond condition violations do not eliminate the right to bail entirely, only the right to release under the original conditions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFuller was indicted for first-degree murder (capital offense) and sexual battery. He was granted pretrial release on $50,000 bond with GPS and SCRAM m…
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 Florida Constitution Article I, Section 14 cases and more on FLexlaw
Bruce D. Fuller petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging the trial court erred when it revoked his pretrial release without notice and the benefit of a hearing. Fuller seeks the following relief: (a) an order that the original conditions of release be immediately reinstated, or (b) that he be immediately brought before the trial court for an immediate hearing to determine conditions of pretrial release. Although we do not find that Fuller is entitled to immediate release or an order that the original conditions of release be reinstated, we grant relief, in part, and hold that petitioner is entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard in the trial court.
Fuller was charged by indictment with first degree murder, a capital offense, and sexual battery. He was granted pretrial release on $50,000 bond with, among other conditions, GPS and SCRAM (alcohol) monitoring. He was also ordered not to consume or possess alcohol. Two months after being granted pretrial release, the trial court received a “SCRAM violation report” indicating a “confirmed consumption of alcohol.” After receiving the violation report, the trial court, sua sponte, entered an order revoking Fuller’s pretrial release and set no bond on the warrant ordering him into custody. When Fuller turned himself in on the warrant, his attorney filed an emergency motion to reinstate conditions of release. The motion was denied without a hearing.
*1278At the outset, we note that Fuller is charged with a capital offense and thus, is not entitled to pretrial release if the proof of guilt is evident or the presumption is great. See Art. I, § 14, Fla. Const.; Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.131(a). However, the trial court may, in its discretion, grant pretrial release and did so here. Fuller claims that because he was initially granted pretrial release, he was entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before the trial court revoked his pretrial release and ordered him held without bond. We agree.1 Although breaching a condition of the bond originally set by the court forfeits a defendant’s right to continued release under the terms of that bond, it does not forfeit the constitutional right to bail altogether. State v. Paul, 783 So.2d 1042, 1050 (Fla.2001). A refusal to readmit a defendant to any bail at all must be subject to the limitations of section 907.041, the pretrial detention statute. Id. Accordingly, we grant the writ and quash the order denying Fuller’s motion to reinstate conditions of release, and remand for hearing on the motion, at which time the trial court shall consider whether pretrial detention is warranted under section 907.041, Florida Statutes. See Perrys v. State, 22 So.3d 740 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
PETITION GRANTED.
TORPY, C.J., LAWSON and BERGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jacarie Joseph v. Junior (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)…petition for writ of habeas corpus and remand this cause to the trial court. The State shall have no more than three business days following the issuance of this opinion to file a legally sufficient motion for pretrial detention.”); Fuller v. State, 116 So. 3d 1277, 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (remanded for rehearing on motion); Buhbut v. Bieluch, 835 So. 2d 1222, 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (remanding for expedited hearing to determine if conditions of bond were violated). State’s May 7, 2021 Response to Order to…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Paul, 783 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2001)
- Perrys v. State, 22 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)