IN THE INTEREST OF D. J., A CHILD
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 delinquent appellant failed to properly prepare the record on appeal according to appellate rules, prompting the appellee to move to dismiss. The court addressed the ambiguity in Florida law regarding whether juvenile delinquency appeals should follow civil or criminal appellate procedures, ultimately holding that such appeals must follow criminal appellate procedures under Part VI of the Florida Appellate Rules.
The court concluded that the record on appeal in juvenile delinquency cases should be prepared and transmitted to the appellate court under the provisions of Part VI of the Florida Appellate Rules, which govern criminal appeals, rather than Part III governing civil appeals.
[1] Appeals in juvenile delinquency cases must be perfected under the Florida Appellate Rules governing criminal appeals.
[2] The record on appeal in juvenile delinquency cases must be prepared and transmitted according to the provisions of Part VI of the Florida Appellate Rules.
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“Neither the statute nor any of the rules make it clear as to whether the appeal is to be perfected under Part III of the appellate rules (governing civil appeals) or under Part VI (governing criminal appeals), the procedures for which differ in several respects.”
Identifies the central ambiguity in Florida law that the court needed to resolve regarding which appellate rules govern juvenile delinquency appeals.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant D.J. was adjudicated delinquent by the Juvenile Division of the Circuit Court of Seminole County. Appellant filed an appeal under Section 39…
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 Record On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
OWEN, Chief Judge.
Appellant was adjudicated a delinquent by the Juvenile Division of the Circuit Court of Seminole County and thereafter filed this appeal as authorized by Section 39.14, F.S. Appellee has moved to dismiss the appeal for certain alleged rule violations, one of which we feel merits discussion.
Appellee’s motion asserted, among other things, that despite a specific request to appellant’s counsel, the latter had failed to provide appellee with a copy of the record on appeal, including a certified copy of the court reporter’s transcribed notes of the proceedings. Upon oral argument of the motion it became apparent that appellant’s failure in this respect was due primarily to a lack of definitive guidelines governing appeals in juvenile cases.
Section 39.14(1), F.S., provides that an appeal may be taken “within the time and in the manner prescribed by the Florida appellate rules.” Unfortunately, neither the statute nor any of the rules make it clear as to whether the appeal is to be perfected under Part III of the appellate rules (governing civil appeals) or under Part VI (governing criminal appeals), the proce-. dures for which differ in several respects. The principal differences lie in the area of preparation of the record on appeal (including obtaining a certified transcript of the court reporter’s notes), the time schedule, and the method of transmitting the record on appeal to the appellate court.
There are many cases which discuss the question of whether juvenile proceedings are civil, rather than criminal, in nature,1 but merely attaching a label will not necessarily resolve the problem. Considering the nature of the delinquency pro ceedings, and the necessity under Rule 8.-130, Rules of Juvenile Procedure, for a court order for the testimony to be transcribed, we conclude that the record on appeal in juvenile delinquency cases should be prepared and transmitted to the appellate court under the provisions of Part VI of the Florida Appellate Rules.
The record on appeal in this case has not been so prepared. However, we are not disposed to dismiss this appeal on that ground. Instead, leave is granted appellant to have the record on appeal prepared, served and filed within thirty days in a manner conformable to the views herein expressed.
Motion to dismiss denied.
CROSS and DOWNEY, JJ., concur. . See State v. Bryant, Fla.App.1973, 276 So. 2d 184; Richardson v. State ex rel. Milton, Fla.App.1969, 219 So. 2d 77; In re T.W.P., Fla.App.1966, 184 So. 2d 507; State v. R.E.F., Fla.App.1971, 251 So. 2d 672; In re T.A.F., Fla.App.1971, 252 So. 2d 255; In re .T.R.H. v. State, FIa.App.1973, 278 So. 2d 314; In re D., Fla.App.1971, 245 So. 2d 273; In re E.P., Fla.App.1974, 291 So. 2d 238 and In re L.G.T., Fla.App.1968, 216 So. 2d 54.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. C.C., 449 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…67 (1978). . Note 3, supra. . Since they hold merely that otherwise authorized juvenile appeals are governed by criminal rather than civil appellate procedural rules, D.S.K. v. State, 396 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) and In the Interest of D.J., 330 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975) are not to the contrary. . I recognize that the same observation may well apply to our review by certiorari, as in State v. Steinbrecher, 409 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), of pre-trial rulings in criminal cases which are not en…
-
Green v. State, 667 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…ed ease law of this state to prove he constructively possessed it. See, e.g., Lewis, 570 So. 2d 346; A.S. v. State, 460 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Manning, 355 So. 2d 166; Hively v. State, 336 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); In Interest of D.J., 330 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Faggionato v. State, 329 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). Nor was this evidence legally sufficient to exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the appellant’s brother, who had possession of the ear after he rented it with Ms. Barnes,…
-
In the Interest of C.L.S. v. State, 586 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…state from taking plenary or interlocutory appeals in juvenile cases.8 Some cases decided before C. C. suggested that juvenile appeals would be treated as criminal appeals. See e.g., D.S.K. v. State, 396 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); In re D.J., 330 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Similarly, R.J.B. v. State, 394 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), approved, 408 So. 2d 1048 (Fla.1982), analyzed whether a waiver order certifying a juvenile for trial as an adult was a “final order,” but looked at the issue in te…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. R. E. F., 251 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Richardson v. State of Fla. ex rel. Richard Douglas Milton, 219 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- In the Interest of T. W. P., 184 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- In the Interest v. D., 245 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- In the Interest of L. G. T., 216 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- State v. Arnett Bryant, 276 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
- In the Interest of E. P., 291 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
- Walker v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Transp., 252 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Olin Dorsey v. State, 276 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
- In the Interest of J. R. H. v. State, 278 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)