R.S., 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.
The court affirmed the adjudication of delinquency for probation violation but reversed the disposition order because the trial court failed to make required written findings before committing the juvenile to a non-secure residential program.
A trial court must make written findings explaining why a juvenile should be committed to a non-secure residential placement for a misdemeanor offense, or enter an appropriate alternative disposition.
[1] A trial court must make written findings that public protection or the child's particular needs require non-secure residential placement before committing a juvenile to s…
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 intelligence“the protection of the public requires such placement or that the particular needs of the child would be best served by such placement”
Florida Statute § 985.441(2)(d) requirement for written findings before committing a child to non-secure residential placement
R.S. was convicted of misdemeanor marijuana possession and placed on juvenile probation. She subsequently violated the terms of her probation.…
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 Written Findings Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, R.S., admitted to violating the terms of her juvenile probation, which were imposed after she was convicted of misdemeanor possession of marijuana. As a result of this violation, the trial court adjudicated her delinquent and committed her to a non-secure residential program. We affirm the adjudication of delinquency, but reverse the disposition order because, as conceded by the State, the trial court erred in committing R.S. to a non-secure residential program without making the required written findings. See § 985.441(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2014) (authorizing the trial court to commit a child whose offense is a misdemeanor to a non-secure residential placement if the court makes written findings that “the protection of the public requires such placement or that the particular needs of the child would be best served by such placement.”). We remand for the trial court to make written findings to support its placement decision, or if it is unable to do so, to enter an appropriate disposition order. See R.S.C. v. State, 157 So.3d 541 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); P.W. v. State, 135 So.3d 583 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); K.M.H. v. State, 91 So.3d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). All other issues raised on appeal are affirmed without further comment.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with directions.
LEWIS, ROWE, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Orando Ricardo Thompson v. State, 257 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
-
J.W. v. State, 264 So. 3d 398 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Scott v. State, 91 So. 3d 262 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)
- K.M.H. v. State, 91 So. 3d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- P.W. v. State, 135 So. 3d 583 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- R.S. C. v. State, 157 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)