V.M.A., A JUVENILE
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2023-05-03
No. 22-0467
Dubow, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2023) 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.


Holding

When the underlying adjudication of delinquency is reversed on direct appeal due to procedural defects in the adjudicatory hearing, a restitution order based on that adjudication must also be vacated and remanded.


Headnotes

[1] Due process considerations in juvenile delinquency proceedings require trial courts to make case-specific findings of necessity before conducting remote adjudicatory hear…

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

Facts & Procedural History

V.M.A., a juvenile, was ordered to pay restitution to a victim following an adjudication in a delinquency case. In a related direct appeal, the 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

Opinion filed May 3, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-467 Lower Tribunal No. 20-406A

________________

V.M.A., a Juvenile,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Scott M. Bernstein, Judge. Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Christina L. Dominguez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before EMAS, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. GORDO, J. V.M.A., a juvenile, appeals an order directing him to pay restitution to the victim. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.145(b)(2). In a related case, V.M.A. directly appealed an order withholding adjudication of delinquency and placing V.M.A. on probation. See V.M.A. v. State, 354 So. 3d 611, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023). This Court reversed and remanded for a new adjudicatory hearing “conclud[ing] that due process considerations inherent in delinquency proceedings require the trial court to make casespecific findings of necessity before conducting a remote adjudicatory hearing.” Id. Accordingly, we vacate the restitution order and remand for further proceedings.1 Reversed and remanded.

Footnotes
1 Because this Court reversed and remanded V.M.A.’s direct appeal, which was the basis of entry of the restitution order, we do not address the merits raised on this appeal.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • V.M.A. v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
    …directing him to pay restitution to the victim. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.145(b)(2). In a related case, V.M.A. directly appealed an order withholding adjudication of delinquency and placing V.M.A. on probation. See V.M.A. v. State, 354 So. 3d 611, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023). This Court reversed and remanded for a new adjudicatory hearing “conclud[ing] that due process considerations inherent in delinquency proceedings require the trial court to make casespecific findings of necessity before con…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw