L.A., A JUVENILE, PETITIONER,
v.
DARRELL CARTER, SUPERINTENDENT, DADE JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER, RESPONDENT
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 court held that a juvenile cannot be detained pending an adjudicatory hearing without a prior judicial determination of probable cause.
[1] A court must determine the existence of probable cause to believe a child has committed a delinquent act before ordering detention.
[2] A probable cause determination for juvenile detention must be made in a nonadversary proceeding.
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 intelligenceA juvenile was arrested and charged with aggravated assault and subsequently ordered into home detention without a probable cause determination. The j…
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 Writ Of Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
L.A., a juvenile, files the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus for review of the trial court’s order detaining petitioner pending adjudicatory hearing. We grant the writ sought.
On August 30, 1993, petitioner was arrested and charged with aggravated assault. On August 31, 1993, a hearing was conducted to determine whether the petitioner should be detained. At that hearing, counsel for petitioner argued that, pursuant to Rule 8.010 of the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, the court had to make a probable cause determination before the court could order the petitioner detained. The court concluded that since the state had filed a petition for delinquency, no judicial determination of probable cause was required. The trial court then referred the petitioner to home detention.
Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.010(f)(1) clearly provides that at the detention hearing the court shall determine:
(1) The existence of probable cause to believe the child has committed a delinquent act. This issue shall be determined in a nonadversary proceeding. The court shall apply the standard of proof necessary for an arrest warrant and its finding may be based upon a sworn complaint, affidavit, deposition under oath, or, if necessary, upon testimony under oath properly recorded.
See P.R. v. Johnson, 541 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA1989); R.B.S. v. Capri, 384 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 3d DCA1980); see also Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 95 S.Ct. 854, 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975); Moss v. Weaver, 525 F. 2d 1258 (5th Cir.1976).
Here, no judicial determination of probable cause was made. Accordingly, based upon our examination of the record and the state’s confession of error, we grant the writ of habeas corpus sought. The juvenile is hereby discharged from home detention but otherwise remains subject to the jurisdiction of the court and subject to subsequent orders. The case is remanded for reconsideration of the determination of probable cause in accordance with Rules 8.010 and 8.013.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
N.H. v. State, 358 So. 3d 477 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)…for writ of habeas corpus. N.W. v. State, 300 So. 3d 803, 804 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (citations omitted). This includes issues related to the trial court’s probable cause determination under Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.010. L.A. v. Carter, 623 So. 2d 1219, 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). At a detention hearing, the finding of probable cause is determined in a nonadversarial proceeding where the trial court must determine whether there is probable cause to believe the child has committed a delinquent act…
Authorities Cited
- Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (U.S. 1975)
- P.R. v. Johnson, 541 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
- R. B. S. v. Capri, 384 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Moss v. Weaver, 525 F.2d 1258 (5th Cir. 1976)