W. B., A MINOR, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE. WILLIAM CALVIN BRYANT, 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.
A juvenile was charged with armed robbery and transferred to adult court where he was convicted and sentenced to 35 years. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the transfer statute and found no abuse of discretion in the juvenile judge's decision to waive jurisdiction, affirming the conviction and sentence.
The court reversed the juvenile judge's declaration that the transfer statute was unconstitutional, as this Court had already upheld its constitutionality in Davis v. State. The court found no abuse of discretion in the transfer to adult court, as the judge properly considered the required factors and the finding of rehabilitation prospects is not mandatory under the statute.
[1] A prior judicial decision upholding the constitutionality of a statute renders moot a lower court's ruling declaring that same statute unconstitutional.
[2] A juvenile judge's decision to transfer a juvenile to adult court for trial is not an abuse of discretion if the judge properly considers the factors required by relevant…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“That part of the juvenile judge's order declaring the statute unconstitutional must accordingly be reversed.”
The court overturned the lower court's unconstitutional ruling based on intervening precedent in Davis v. State.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant, a minor, was charged with armed robbery along with two adult codefendants who participated in the same crime. Evidence at the transfer …
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 Rehabilitation Prospects cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
These consolidated appeals are from a judgment of the Circuit Court in and for Okaloosa County following a jury trial in which the defendant, a juvenile, was found guilty of armed robbery and thereafter sentenced to 35 years.
Defendant seeks reversal of the judgment, contending the juvenile judge erred in declaring Section 39.09(2) (c), Florida Statutes 1973, unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution. Subsequent to the juvenile judge’s ruling, this Court rendered its decision in Davis v. State, 297 So. 2d 289 (Fla.1974), upholding the constitutionality of Section 39.09(2) (c), Florida Statutes. That part of the juvenile judge’s order declaring the statute unconstitutional must accordingly be reversed.
Defendant-appellant also alleges that the juvenile judge abused his discretion in transferring him to the circuit court for trial as an adult without determining whether there was a reasonable prospect of rehabilitation prior to his reaching majority. That finding is not mandatory under Section 39.09(2) (c), Florida Statutes 1973. Davis v. State, supra.
We find no abuse of discretion in the juvenile judge’s decision to transfer the defendant to the circuit court for trial as an adult. He properly considered the elements and factors required in Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541, 86 S.Ct. 1045, 16 L.Ed.2d 84 (1966); Davis v. State, supra, and Section 39.09(2) (c) as construed by this Court. The record reflects that (1) two adult codefendants who participated in the robbery were separately tried in the circuit court; (2) the offense committed was a violent crime against individuals, and evidence at the transfer hearing indicated there was probable cause that the defendant had held a loaded weapon within inches of a victim’s head.
The juvenile judge also found that the Division of Corrections was as capable as the Division of Youth Services of offering defendant rehabilitative services. It is noted that the Division of Corrections may transfer youthful offenders to the Division of Youth Services for control and rehabilitation. See Section 959.116(1), Florida Statutes 1973.
The order of the juvenile judge is reversed as it applies to declaring Section 39.09(2) (c), Florida Statutes, unconstitutional.' The order of transfer and the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
ADKINS, C. J., ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., and FERRIS, Circuit Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Gaylon E. Boatman, 329 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1976)…urs. . Art. V, § 3,(b) (3), Fla.Const. . § 39.02(6), F.S. (1971), was applicable at the time of this proceeding. It has since been amended by § 39.09(2), F.S. (1973), as construed by Davis v. State, 297 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1974), and Bryant v. State, 313 So. 2d 711 (Fla.1975). . Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541, 86 S.Ct. 1045, 16 L.Ed.2d 84 (1966) ; Davis v. State, supra note 2. Bryant v. State, supra note 2. . Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. at 530, 92 S.Ct. at 2192, 33 L.Ed.2d at 117, identifies four factors…
-
Kazakoff v. State, 642 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…ainst [Kazakoff].” Drotzur v. State, 372 So. 2d 515, 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). We also conclude that the order, [*599] when read in its entirety, reflects the trial court properly considered and evaluated all of the other criteria. See W.B. v. State, 313 So. 2d 711 (Fla.1975); Leonard v. State, 522 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). . We do likewise with regard to Rice v. State, 311 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), which was the [*600] underpinning for the holding in G.D.W. 395 So. 2d at 639 n. 3. We leave undistu…
-
F. L. A. v. State, 328 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See W. B. v. State, Fla. 1975, 313 So. 2d 711.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 (U.S. 1966)
- Davis v. State, 297 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1974)