SSM v. State, 814 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). · Go Syfert
Search
SSM v. State, 814 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (20 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: GL v. State (fladistctapp, 2006-09-15)
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) GL v. State (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
T.N. v. State, 929 So.2d 1133, 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); C.M.L. v. State, 895 So.2d 495, 496 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1234-35 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) G.L. v. State (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
T.N. v. State, 929 So.2d 1133, 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); C.M.L. v. State, 895 So.2d 495, 496 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1234-35 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) K.R.T. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
See N.B., 911 So.2d at 836 ; S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (vacating where “[t]he reasons given for imposing a level 8 program here were that the minor appeared to be out of control and disrespectful to her mother,” but “[t]he court made no reference to the level 8 restrictiveness level or how such a level served the needs of S.S.M.”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) KRT v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
See N.B., 911 So.2d at 836 ; *512 S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (vacating where "[t]he reasons given for imposing a level 8 program here were that the minor appeared to be out of control and disrespectful to her mother," but "[t]he court made no reference to the level 8 restrictiveness level or how such a level served the needs of S.S.M.").
discussed Cited as authority (rule) CML v. State (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
L.O. v. State, 718 So.2d 155 , 157 (Fla.1998); S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1234-1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) C.M.L. v. State (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
L.O. v. State, 718 So.2d 155 , 157 (Fla.1998); S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1234-1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
discussed Cited "see" KS v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: accord · confidence high
The trial court failed to "explain how or why a *352 `long prior' record might lead the trial court to impose a moderate risk commitment." The First District admitted that it could speculate as to why the court imposed the commitment level it did, but reasoned, "such speculation cannot be the basis of appellate review." Id.; accord S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)(vacating the juvenile court's order and remanding because the court had not referenced the characteristics of the restrictiveness level and the needs of the child).
discussed Cited "see" K.S. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: accord · confidence high
The trial court failed to “explain how or why a ‘long prior’ record might lead the trial court to impose a moderate risk commitment.” The First District admitted that it could speculate as to why the court imposed the commitment level it did, but reasoned, “such speculation cannot be the basis of appellate review.” Id.; accord S.S.M. v. State, 814 So.2d 1234, 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)(vacating the juvenile court’s order and remanding because the court had not referenced the characteristics of the restrictiveness level and the needs of the child).
S.S.M., A Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
5D01-1054.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
May 3, 2002.
814 So. 2d 1234
Per Curiam.
Published

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Scott Ragan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alfred Washington, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

S.S.M. was committed to a level 8, high-risk residential program. This commitment ignored the recommendations of the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ).

A trial court may disregard the recommendations of the DJJ in a juvenile proceeding. See § 985.23(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001). However, when the recommendations are disregarded, the court must state the reasons for doing so, including making reference to the characteristics of the restrictiveness[*1235] level and the needs of the child. A.G. v. State, 737 So.2d 1244, 1247 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). The reasons given for imposing a level 8 program here were that the minor appeared to be out of control and disrespectful to her mother. The court made no reference to the level 8 restrictiveness level or how such a level served the needs of S.S.M. Furthermore, considering the offenses committed by S.S.M. (resisting arrest without violence and disrupting a school class), it is unlikely that such a commitment was necessary to protect the "public safety." § 985.03(45)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001).

We vacate the commitment order and remand for sentencing in accordance with the DJJ recommendations or a sentence that is justified by the record with stated reasons. The commitment order should also indicate the term of sentence; the order appealed committed S.S.M. for an indefinite period.

ORDER VACATED; REMANDED.

THOMPSON, C.J., PETERSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.