T.M., A CHILD, 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.
The court held that a trial court must enter written findings to justify secure detention, even if findings are made orally at a hearing.
Petitioner pled to lewd conduct and was ordered held in secure detention pending placement in a program. Petitioner did not score high enough on a ris…
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 Risk Assessment Instrument cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he is being wrongfully detained in secure detention. Petitioner pled to lewd and lascivious conduct on a victim less than twelve years of age, and the trial court ordered Petitioner held in secure detention while awaiting an opening in a non-secure residential commitment program. Petitioner did not score high enough for secure detention on his risk assessment instrument, and the State concedes that the trial court did not enter any written findings otherwise justifying secure detention.
Generally, determinations regarding placement of a minor in secure detention are based on the risk assessment. § 985.245(1), Fla. Stat. (2016). However, section 985.255 permits the court to otherwise order secure detention based upon *746written findings. See § 985.255, Fla. Stat. (2016). However, “[w]here a statute requires a written order giving findings and reasons, the transcript of the proceedings upon which the order was based cannot act as a substitute.” A.D. v. State, 45 So.3d 575, 576 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (quoting R.B.S. v. Capri, 384 So.2d 692, 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)).
Although the trial court made findings of fact at the hearing sufficient to support secure detention, the trial court failed to enter a vmtten order reflecting those findings as required by statute. Therefore,- we direct the trial court to either enter a written order justifying Petitioner’s secure detention, or to order Petitioner’s release therefrom, by 5:00 p.m, on the second business day following the date of issuance of this opinion. See A.D. v. State, 45 So.3d at 576.
PETITION GRANTED.
ORFINGER, EDWARDS, and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- R. B. S. v. Capri, 384 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- A.D. v. State, 45 So. 3d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)