Opinion
No. 1D20-2058
07-24-2020
N.W., a Child, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Charlie Cofer, Public Defender, and Elizabeth Hogan Webb, Assistant Public Defender, Jacksonville, for Petitioner. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Charlie Cofer, Public Defender, and Elizabeth Hogan Webb, Assistant Public Defender, Jacksonville, for Petitioner.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Per Curiam.
N.W., a child, petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus, seeking release from detention. The child argues that the Clay County circuit court ordered the detention in violation of the applicable Florida statutes.
N.W. was charged with 17 counts of criminal mischief. He failed to appear for a court hearing, and the trial court issued a custody order for his pickup following this failure to appear. N.W. was then taken into custody, and at his first appearance, the Department of Juvenile Justice ("DJJ") scored him with zero points on the risk assessment instrument. Due to Petitioner's previous failure to appear, the trial court ordered Petitioner held in secured detention for 72 hours so a comprehensive evaluation could occur. Petitioner was released on June 20, 2020, with a new court date.
Petitioner failed to appear for his next court hearing as well, and the trial court issued a custody order with instructions Petitioner be detained until he could appear before Clay County Circuit Judge Mobley. Petitioner was arrested on July 4, 2020. He made his first appearance on July 5, 2020, at which time the DJJ asserted that Petitioner should be released due to his risk assessment score of zero. However, Petitioner was held in secured detention until he appeared before Judge Mobley on July 15, 2020. At this hearing, Judge Mobley released Petitioner from secured detention but ordered him placed on home detention with ankle monitoring so as to ensure his appearance at future hearings which are scheduled to occur July 29, 2020, and August 12, 2020.
A habeas corpus petition is a proper remedy to challenge the legality of a juvenile's detention. T.L.W. v. Soud , 645 So. 2d 1101, 1104 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) ; Cf. G.P. v. Bessette , 831 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (granting habeas petition and ordering juvenile's immediate release because detention violated the statute). This Court's analysis of whether a juvenile may be placed in detention when the child has scored a zero on his risk assessment instrument is a pure question of law subject to de novo review. State v. S.M. , 131 So. 3d 780, 785 (Fla. 2013).
The power to place into detention juveniles charged with or found to have committed a delinquent act is entirely statutory in nature, and strict compliance with the governing statute is required. See J.D. v. State , 954 So. 2d 93, 95 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) ; S.W. v. Woolsey , 673 So. 2d 152, 154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). It is appropriate to grant a writ of habeas corpus when "a juvenile is detained in violation of risk assessment requirements, detention statutes, and case law." T.B. v. State , 897 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
When a juvenile is detained on a judicial order for failure to appear and has previously willfully failed to appear after proper notice, section 985.255(1)(e), Florida Statutes, allows the trial court to detain the juvenile in secure detention for up to 72 hours in advance of the next scheduled court hearing. The secure detention of a juvenile in excess of this 72-hour period is generally impermissible, absent factors that are not at issue in the instant petition. A.K. v. Dobuler , 951 So. 2d 989, 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).
Petitioner was held in secured detention from July 5, 2020, until July 15, 2020, even though section 985.255(1)(e), Florida Statutes, generally permits a juvenile to be held in secured detention for only 72 hours when the juvenile has previously failed to appear at court hearings. As such, Petitioner's continued secured detention beyond the permissible 72-hour period was impermissible.
The lower tribunal did release Petitioner from secured detention on July 15, 2020. However, after leaving secured detention, Petitioner is subject to home detention with ankle monitoring to ensure his appearance at future hearings, which are currently scheduled on July 29, 2020, and August 12, 2020. Petitioner objected to this home detention, which was ordered even though DJJ scored Petitioner a zero on the risk assessment instrument. In the order imposing home detention, the lower tribunal failed to cite any statutory authority for Petitioner's home detention.
In light of these circumstances and the requirement that juvenile detention strictly comply with the applicable statutory requirements, we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and order that the Petitioner be released from the detention ordered by the trial court.
Lewis, Roberts, and Makar, JJ., concur.