J.R., A CHILD
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA AND ADRIAN MATHENA, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE ORANGE REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER
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 petitioner challenged his detention in secure conditions at a detention center, claiming he was being held unlawfully despite DRAI assessment scores insufficient to justify secure detention. The court granted the habeas corpus petition and ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine proper placement, directing release from secure detention unless the trial court entered proper written findings.
The court granted the habeas corpus petition and directed the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the nature of J.R.'s detention. If the representations about secure detention conditions were accurate, the trial court must either enter a written order complying with section 985.255(2) or order J.R.'s release from secure detention within two business days.
[1] A child's detention in secure detention requires a written statement of clear and convincing reasons when the child scores below a certain threshold on the Detention Risk…
[2] A trial court must make specific written findings that respite care is unavailable and that secure detention is necessary to protect a victim from injury before a child c…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“J.R. scored five points on the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (DRAI), which is not enough to justify secure detention without a written statement of clear and convincing reasons.”
Establishes the insufficient DRAI score that triggered the legal violation regarding detention conditions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.R., a child, was arrested on November 19, 2019, on charges of battery with domestic violence and tampering with a witness. At arraignment on Novembe…
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 Unlawful Detention cases and more on FLexlaw
WALLIS, J.
J.R., a child, petitions this Court for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he is being unlawfully detained in secure detention. We grant the petition.
J.R. was arrested on November 19, 2019, on charges of battery with domestic violence and tampering with a witness to hinder communication to a law enforcement officer. At J.R.'s arraignment on November 20, 2019, the trial court noted that J.R. scored five points on the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (DRAI), which is not enough to justify secure detention without a written statement of clear and convincing reasons.
J.R.'s mother requested at the arraignment that J.R. be released to respite care. However, the trial court was informed that the youth shelter refused to accommodate J.R. Consequently, the trial court ordered J.R.'s release to "Parent/Guardian/Youth Shelter based on domestic violence in the home" and stated that "if there are no beds available at the youth shelter, the youth is to remain detained at Orange Regional Juvenile Detention Center (ORJDC) in respite care."
However, J.R.’s counsel indicates that although J.R. is categorized as being held in respite care at the Detention Center, he is currently being held under the same conditions as "secure detention." Based on counsel's representations to this Court, this placement is likely more restrictive than what is legally permissible according to the DRAI results. Moreover, the trial court's findings in the release order are insufficient for J.R.'s confinement in secured detention pursuant to section 985.255(2), Florida Statutes.
Therefore, we grant the petition and direct the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the nature of J.R.'s detention. If counsel's representations are accurate, then the trial court is directed to either enter a written order in accordance with section 985.255(2) or order J.R.'s release from secure detention by 5:00 p.m. on the second business day following the date of issuance of this opinion. See D.F. v. Housel, 10 So. 3d 694, 695 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). 2 PETITION GRANTED.
EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur. 3