A.T., A CHILD
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 4th DCA | 2022-06-22
No. 22-1097
Brown, Dykman, Pratt
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2022) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

A juvenile petitioner challenges his continued home detention beyond twenty-one days after being found incompetent to proceed, arguing the trial court lacks authority for such extension. The court holds that Florida Statute § 985.26(4)(a) provides authority for extended detention when the proceeding is effectively continued due to incompetency and the juvenile poses a danger to the community.


Holding

The trial court has authority under Florida Statute § 985.26(4)(a) to extend a juvenile's detention beyond the initial twenty-one day period when proceedings are effectively continued due to the juvenile's incompetency and the juvenile poses a danger to the community.


Headnotes

[1] When a juvenile is found incompetent to proceed and adjudicatory proceedings are stayed pending restoration of competency, the incompetency proceeding constitutes a continuance for cause under Fla. …

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

Key Quotes

“nothing in Chapter 985, Florida Statutes or the Rules of Juvenile Procedure prohibits an incompetent child not subject to commitment from remaining on detention status when he continues to score for such and the adjudicatory hearing has been properly continued for good cause.”

Citation to J.W. v. Department of Juvenile Justice, recognizing authority to continue juvenile detention in extraordinary circumstances

Facts & Procedural History

The juvenile was charged with several felonies, including discharge of a firearm. He was later arrested again while on home detention. The trial court…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

A juvenile petitions for habeas corpus challenging his continued home detention beyond twenty-one days after having been found incompetent to proceed. He claims that the trial court has no authority to extend his detention until his competency is restored. The trial court relied on section 985.26(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2021), to extend his detention, finding him to be a danger to the community were he to be released.

We agree that the statute provides authority for this juvenile’s further detention. The statute provides:

The time limits in subsections (2) and (3) [regarding length of detention] do not include periods of delay resulting from a continuance granted by the court for cause on motion of the child or his or her counsel or of the state. Upon the issuance of an order granting a continuance for cause on a motion by either the child, the child’s counsel, or the state, the court shall conduct a hearing at the end of each 72-hour period, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, to determine the need for continued detention of the child and the need for further continuance of proceedings for the child or the state. § 985.26(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2021). When the proceeding was stayed as a result of the juvenile’s incompetency, the proceeding was effectively continued, allowing the trial court to extend detention for cause.

In J.W. v. Department of Juvenile Justice, 742 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), the First District recognized that, in extraordinary circumstances posing a threat to public safety, a court may continue a juvenile’s detention pending competency restoration, even if the juvenile does not qualify for commitment. Id. at 321 (“[N]othing in Chapter 985, Florida Statutes or the Rules of Juvenile Procedure prohibits an incompetent child not subject to commitment from remaining on detention status when he continues to score for such and the adjudicatory hearing has been properly continued for good cause.”). We cited J.W. with approval in M.A. v. State, 964 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Id. at 832 (“We agree that in spite of a pending competency evaluation a child may nevertheless be placed in secure detention before disposition of the new VOP charge when it appears that the child may be violating pre-existing conditions of release.”).

This juvenile was charged with several felonies, including the discharge of a firearm. He was later arrested again while on home detention. The trial court considered that he was a danger to the community, and this provided good cause for extending his detention while proceedings were delayed due to his incompetency. The trial court did not act without authority. We deny the petition.

Petition denied. WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and LEVINE, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • N. N. R. v. Grice (Fla. 2d DCA 2023)
    …ory basis for the court to continue N.N.R. in secure detention pending her placement in a SIPP. The court issued a detention order memorializing its findings and clarifying that N.N.R. was being held pursuant to section 985.26(4) and A.T. v. State, 341 So. 3d 351, 351 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022). See § 985.26(4) (providing that the time limits for a child's detention do not include periods of delay resulting from a continuance granted for good cause); A.T., 341 So. 3d at 351 (holding that when the proceeding was st…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw