A.S., A CHILD, 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.
The trial court erred by departing from the Department of Juvenile Justice's disposition recommendation without adequately stating its reasons, failing to consider the child's needs and alternative dispositions.
A juvenile was charged with possessing a firearm on school property, pled to carrying a concealed weapon, and had prior charges closed without sanctio…
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 Needs Of The Child cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, J.
A.S., a juvenile, appeals his commitment to a level 6 program after a determination of dependency. We reverse.
A.S. was charged by petition with one count of possession of a firearm on school property, a third-degree felony. He pled to the lesser offense of carrying a concealed weapon, a first-degree misdemean-or. According to his pre-disposition report [“PDR”], A.S. had brought a firearm and empty magazine to school in order to return them to another child to whom he claimed the gun belonged. Appellant’s PDR also reflected two prior charges in 1998, but both were closed without sanction. The Department of Juvenile Justice [“DJJ”] recommended adjudication be withheld and appellant be placed on probation. At the disposition hearing, however, the trial court decided that probation was not an appropriate punishment because bringing a firearm to school was quite serious. Instead, he committed him to a level 6 facility.
As we have said many times, the trial court may disregard the DJJ’s recommendation for disposition, under section 985.23(3)(c), Florida Statutes (2005), but the judge must state its reasons for doing so and must include references to the characteristics of the restrictiveness level and the needs of the child. See G.L. v. State, 937 So. 2d 801, 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Consideration of the nature of the charge is not alone a sufficient reason to depart. Id.
Here, it is apparent from the record that the court’s reasons for departing were: (1) the nature of the offense and (2) the desire not to send the wrong message about whether taking firearms to school will be condoned. The needs of the child and the characteristics of the alternative dispositions were not mentioned. This case, which involves the same judge, is very much like G.L. We reverse the trial court’s order and remand for sentencing in accordance with DJJ’s recommendation.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PALMER and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.S. v. State, 971 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…ord evidence that the court considered the DJJ’s pre-disposition report, (“PDR”), this court must reverse and remand. Id. Further, the seriousness of the charge is not a sufficient reason to depart from the DJJ’s recommendation. E.g., A.S. v. State, 948 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). In the instant case, although it appears the trial court considered the PDR and the DJJ’s recommendation, the reasons articulated by the court for its disposition simply demonstrate the trial judge’s disagreement with the recom…
Authorities Cited
- G.L. v. State, 937 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)