IN THE INTEREST OF T. W. P., APPELLANT
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 Florida Supreme Court dismissed an appeal concerning a juvenile's release from the Florida School for Boys because the juvenile had already been released, rendering the appeal moot. The court found no further relief could be granted and that the juvenile proceedings did not carry a stigma justifying further adjudication.
No, the appeal should not be adjudicated because the juvenile's release renders the appeal moot and no further relief can be granted.
“no useful purpose would be served to adjudicate the merits of the appeal since a hearing de novo in the juvenile court, if granted, would not afford Appellant any greater relief than he enjoys under his release.”
Reasoning for dismissing the appeal as moot.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe juvenile appellant, T. W. P., had been released from the Florida School for Boys at Okeechobee. The appellant's counsel did not dispute this fact …
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 De Novo Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
It appears from the Appellee’s brief that on May 6, 1966 the juvenile Appellant, T. W. P., was released from the Florida School for Boys at Okeechobee. In the oral argument before us Appellant’s counsel did not dispute the fact Appellant had been released. This being so, no useful purpose would be served to adjudicate the merits of the appeal since a hearing de novo in the juvenile court, if granted, would not afford Appellant any greater relief than he enjoys under his release.
Furthermore, the juvenile proceedings herein are not criminal proceedings and no stigma attached to the Appellant growing out of such proceedings which would justify reaching back of the release and vitiating the adjudication in the juvenile court.
The appeal is dismissed.
THORNAL, C. J., THOMAS, DREW, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., and SACK, Circuit Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Steinhauer, 216 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 1968)…argument because we feel that the instant decision does directly conflict with Ex parte Kitts, 109 Fla. 202, 147 So. 573 (1933), and Sult v. Weber, 210 So. 2d 739 (4th Dist.Ct.App.Fla.1968). It likewise conflicts with obiter dictum in In re T.W.P., 192 So. 2d 482 (Fla.1966). See Sunad, Inc. v. City of Sarasota, 122 So. 2d 611 (Fla.1960). The conflict derives from the following statements in Steinhauer, supra: “We interpret what was said in Gault and Kent, when read together, to mean that the basic requirem…
-
Sheppard v. Williams, 193 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…m dismissed. In an action for declaratory relief there must be an existing adverse interest. Ashe v. City of Boca Raton, Fla.App.1961, 133 So. 2d 122. The issues presented herein are moot as to the plaintiff. See In the Interest of T.W.P., Fla.1966, 192 So. 2d 482, opinion filed December 7, 1966. Further, plaintiff does not adequately represent the members of the alleged class as his interest is no longer co-extensive with the interest of the other members. Port Royal, Inc. v. Conboy, Fla.App.1963, 154 So. 2d…