JOSE SANTOS, PETITIONER,
v.
HONORABLE EDWARD GARRISON, CIRCUIT JUDGE, AND ROBERT NEUMANN, SHERIFF, PALM BEACH COUNTY, RESPONDENTS
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 trial court cannot revoke or increase bond sua sponte without a showing of changed circumstances or previously undisclosed information, and that a federal statute concerning alien detention was not applicable.
Petitioner's bond was initially set and posted, but a different judge later revoked it sua sponte upon learning Petitioner was an illegal alien. The r…
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 Undisclosed Information cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We grant this petition for writ of habeas corpus and quash an order revoking Petitioner’s bond and directing that he be held without bond.
Initially bond was set at the first appearance hearing. Bond was posted and Petitioner was released. At a subsequent hearing, before a different judge, Petitioner acknowledged that he was an illegal alien. The court, sua sponte, revoked Petitioner’s bond and ordered that he be held without bond with leave to re-apply following release clearance by the “border patrol.” The record does not reflect whether Petitioner’s immigration status was disclosed at the time bond was initially set.
It is undisputed that an increase in, or revocation of, bond may be imposed only based on a change in circumstances or upon information not disclosed to the court at the time bond was previously established. It is the state’s burden to bring such new information to the court’s attention. Absent such, the initial bond must be reinstated. See Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Kelsey v. McMillan, 560 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Sikes v. McMillian, 564 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
We have considered 8 U.S.C. § 1252(c), apparently relied on by the trial court, and deem it inapposite. The detention of illegal aliens contemplated by that law requires a showing that the accused has previously been convicted of a felony and receipt of an appropriate hold from the Immigration and Naturalization Service for the purpose of taking the individual into federal custody.
Therefore, we grant the petition, vacate the order, and remand with direction that the court conduct an immediate hearing and either reinstate the initial bond, or, upon proper motion and notice, reconsider the bond in the event Petitioner’s status was not disclosed at the time the bond was initially set.
STONE, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Glendon Goelz v. Bradshaw, 906 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…The State does not dispute that a revocation of bond requires a change in circumstances or information that was not disclosed to the court when the bond was originally set. Nevadomski v. Jenne, 756 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Santos v. Garrison, 691 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). The State has the burden of proving that there is a change in circumstances or new information that warrants the increase or revocation of bond. Lee v. Bieluch, 855 So. 2d 7…
-
Creech v. Ryan, 972 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…g the changed circumstances. Sikes v. McMillian, 564 So. 2d 1206, 1208 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). If the State does not prove that the information was not before the original judge, the bond must be reduced to the level originally set. Santos v. Garrison, 691 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Moreover, the trial court cannot on its own initiative increase bond. Sueliman v. Jenne, 935 So. 2d 120,121 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). From the limited record presented in the case before us, there is no showing of changed circumstan…
-
Homerding v. Jenne, 804 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…efendant’s bond is improper unless the state shows that the increase is warranted by information not available to the committing magistrate who set the initial bond. See Bowers [v. Jenne, 710 So. 2d 681, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)]; Santos v. Garrison, 691 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186, 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Sikes v. McMillian, 564 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Kelsey v. McMillan, 560 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Nothing in the record shows any violation or failure…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Keane v. Cochran, 614 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Kelsey v. McMILLAN, 560 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Sikes v. McMILLIAN, 564 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)