Mandatory juvenile sanctions for firearm offenses apply when the minor is not committed to a residential program, regardless of conditional future placement orders.
A juvenile charged with aggravated assault with a firearm pleads guilty and receives intensive community supervision with a conditional order for residential placement upon violation, plus mandatory detention and community service. The issue is whether the mandatory sanctions apply when the juvenile is not immediately committed to a residential program. The court applies the plain meaning of the statute, defining commitment as official placement in confinement. Because the juvenile has not yet been committed to a residential program, the statutory exception is not triggered. The court affirms the trial court's imposition of the mandatory five-day detention and one hundred hours of community service.
At page 1222 Defining the term commit in juvenile confinement statutes1 citing caseWe affirm the trial court's ruling based on the plain meaning of the statutory language. In this case, the pertinent meaning of "commit" is to place officially…
- S.C. v. Peterson, 718 So. 2d 220 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).publishedThe court reasoned that the meaning of the term "commit" was "to place officially in confinement or custody," and that the juvenile had "yet to be committed, and [might] never be committed to a residential program." Id. at 1222.
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Carl S. McGinnes, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Kristina White, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant contends the trial court erred in ordering him to spend five days in detention and perform 100 hours of community service in accordance with section 790.22(9)(a), Florida Statutes.[1] Appellant, a 15-year-old who was charged with aggravated assault with a firearm, entered a negotiated plea and was placed in an intensive community supervision program, with the proviso that should he violate that supervision, he would be placed in a level VI residential program. In addition, he was ordered to spend the five days in detention and perform 100 hours of community service. The trial court ruled that because he had been given the alternative community supervision, appellant had not been committed to a residential program as envisioned by the statute. Appellant contends that he was, in effect, committed to a residential program, even though, depending on how he does under the intensive community supervision, he may never actually enter the residential program.
[*1222] We affirm the trial court's ruling based on the plain meaning of the statutory language. In this case, the pertinent meaning of "commit" is to place officially in confinement or custody. See American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 268 (1979). Appellant has yet to be committed, and may never be committed, to a residential program.
Our conclusion is further supported by the reasoning set forth in T.M. v. State, 689 So.2d 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), in which the court noted that due to the remedial nature of this statute, it should be "accorded a liberal interpretation so as to carry out the intent of the legislature." See id. at 445. That court also noted that "[t]he statute is obviously designed to get the immediate attention of all juveniles and to issue a `wake-up call' that the state deems their firearm offenses to be serious enough to warrant the automatic deprivation of their liberty for a period of time, even on a first offense." See id. at 446.
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH, JOANOS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
(a) For a first offense, that the minor serve a mandatory period of detention of 5 days in a secure detention facility and perform 100 hours of community service.