948.08
Pretrial intervention program.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
948.08 Pretrial intervention program.—
(1) The department shall supervise pretrial intervention programs for persons charged with a crime, before or after any information has been filed or an indictment has been returned in the circuit court. Such programs shall provide appropriate counseling, education, supervision, and medical and psychological treatment as available and when appropriate for the persons released to such programs.
(2) Any first offender, or any person previously convicted of not more than one nonviolent misdemeanor, who is charged with any misdemeanor or felony of the third degree is eligible for release to the pretrial intervention program on the approval of the administrator of the program and the consent of the victim, the state attorney, and the judge who presided at the initial appearance hearing of the offender. However, the defendant may not be released to the pretrial intervention program unless, after consultation with his or her attorney, he or she has voluntarily agreed to such program and has knowingly and intelligently waived his or her right to a speedy trial for the period of his or her diversion. The defendant or the defendant’s immediate family may not personally contact the victim or the victim’s immediate family to acquire the victim’s consent under this section.
(3) The criminal charges against an offender admitted to the program shall be continued without final disposition for a period of 90 days after the date the offender was released to the program, if the offender’s participation in the program is satisfactory, and for an additional 90 days upon the request of the program administrator and consent of the state attorney, if the offender’s participation in the program is satisfactory.
(4) Resumption of pending criminal proceedings shall be undertaken at any time if the program administrator or state attorney finds that the offender is not fulfilling his or her obligations under this plan or if the public interest so requires. The court may not appoint the public defender to represent an indigent offender released to the pretrial intervention program unless the offender’s release is revoked and the offender is subject to imprisonment if convicted.
(5) At the end of the intervention period, the administrator shall recommend:
(a) That the case revert to normal channels for prosecution in instances in which the offender’s participation in the program has been unsatisfactory;
(b) That the offender is in need of further supervision; or
(c) That dismissal of charges without prejudice shall be entered in instances in which prosecution is not deemed necessary.
The state attorney shall make the final determination as to whether the prosecution shall continue.
(6)(a) For purposes of this subsection, the term “nonviolent felony” means a third degree felony violation of chapter 810 or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in s. 776.08.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of this section, a person is eligible for voluntary admission into a pretrial substance abuse education and treatment intervention program, including a treatment-based drug court program established pursuant to s. 397.334, approved by the chief judge of the circuit, for a period to be determined by the court, based on the clinical needs of the defendant, if he or she:
1. Is identified as having a substance abuse problem and is amenable to treatment.
2. Is charged with a nonviolent felony.
3. Is not also charged with a crime involving violence, including, but not limited to, murder, sexual battery, robbery, carjacking, home-invasion robbery, or any other crime involving violence.
4. Has two or fewer felony convictions, provided that the prior convictions are for nonviolent felonies.
(c) Upon motion of either party or the court’s own motion, and with the agreement of the defendant, the court shall admit an eligible person into a pretrial substance abuse education and treatment intervention program, except:
1. If the state attorney believes that the facts and circumstances of the case suggest the defendant’s involvement in the dealing and selling of controlled substances, the court shall hold a preadmission hearing. If the state attorney establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence at such hearing, that the defendant was involved in the dealing or selling of controlled substances, the court shall deny the defendant’s admission into a pretrial intervention program.
2. If the defendant has two or fewer prior felony convictions as provided in subparagraph (b)4., the court, in its discretion, may deny admission to such a program.
(d) While enrolled in a pretrial intervention program authorized by this subsection, the participant is subject to a coordinated strategy developed by a drug court team under s. 397.334(4). The coordinated strategy may include a protocol of sanctions that may be imposed upon the participant for noncompliance with program rules. The protocol of sanctions may include, but is not limited to, placement in a substance abuse treatment program offered by a licensed service provider as defined in s. 397.311 or in a jail-based treatment program or serving a period of incarceration within the time limits established for contempt of court. The coordinated strategy must be provided in writing to the participant before the participant agrees to enter into a pretrial treatment-based drug court program or other pretrial intervention program. Any person whose charges are dismissed after successful completion of the treatment-based drug court program, if otherwise eligible, may have his or her arrest record and plea of nolo contendere to the dismissed charges expunged under s. 943.0585.
(e) At the end of the pretrial intervention period, the court shall consider the recommendation of the program administrator pursuant to subsection (5) and the recommendation of the state attorney as to disposition of the pending charges. The court shall determine, by written finding, whether the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program. Notwithstanding the coordinated strategy developed by a drug court team pursuant to s. 397.334(4), if the court finds that the defendant has not successfully completed the pretrial intervention program, the court may order the person to continue in education and treatment, which may include substance abuse treatment programs offered by licensed service providers as defined in s. 397.311 or jail-based treatment programs, or order that the charges revert to normal channels for prosecution. The court shall dismiss the charges upon a finding that the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program.
(f) Any entity, whether public or private, providing a pretrial substance abuse education and treatment intervention program under this subsection must contract with the county or appropriate governmental entity, and the terms of the contract must include, but need not be limited to, the requirements established for private entities under s. 948.15(3).
(7)(a) A person who is charged with a felony, other than a felony listed in s. 948.06(8)(c), and who is identified as a veteran or a servicemember, as defined in s. 394.47891(2)(d) or (c), respectively, and is otherwise qualified to participate in a veterans treatment court program under s. 394.47891 is eligible for admission into a veterans treatment court program pursuant to the requirements of s. 394.47891(4) and (8).
(b) While enrolled in a pretrial intervention program authorized by this subsection, the participant shall be subject to a coordinated strategy developed by a veterans’ treatment intervention team. The coordinated strategy should be modeled after the therapeutic jurisprudence principles and key components in s. 397.334(4), with treatment specific to the needs of servicemembers and veterans. The coordinated strategy may include a protocol of sanctions that may be imposed upon the participant for noncompliance with program rules. The protocol of sanctions may include, but need not be limited to, placement in a treatment program offered by a licensed service provider or in a jail-based treatment program or serving a period of incarceration within the time limits established for contempt of court. The coordinated strategy must be provided in writing to the participant before the participant agrees to enter into a pretrial veterans’ treatment intervention program or other pretrial intervention program. Any person whose charges are dismissed after successful completion of the pretrial veterans’ treatment intervention program, if otherwise eligible, may have his or her arrest record of the dismissed charges expunged under s. 943.0585.
(c) At the end of the pretrial intervention period, the court shall consider the recommendation of the program administrator and the recommendation of the state attorney as to disposition of the pending charges. The court shall determine, by written finding, whether the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program. If the court finds that the defendant has not successfully completed the pretrial intervention program, the court may order the person to continue in education and treatment, which may include treatment programs offered by licensed service providers or jail-based treatment programs, or order that the charges revert to normal channels for prosecution. The court shall dismiss the charges upon a finding that the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program.
(8)(a) Notwithstanding any provision of this section, a defendant is eligible for voluntary admission into a pretrial mental health court program established pursuant to s. 394.47892 and approved by the chief judge of the circuit for a period to be determined by the court, based on the clinical needs of the defendant, upon motion of either party or the court’s own motion if:
1. The defendant is identified as having a mental illness; and
2. The defendant is charged with:
a. A nonviolent felony that includes a third degree felony violation of chapter 810 or any other felony offense that is not a forcible felony as defined in s. 776.08;
b. Resisting an officer with violence under s. 843.01, if the law enforcement officer and state attorney consent to the defendant’s participation;
c. Battery on a law enforcement officer under s. 784.07, if the law enforcement officer and state attorney consent to the defendant’s participation; or
d. Aggravated assault, if the victim and state attorney consent to the defendant’s participation.
(b) At the end of the pretrial intervention period, the court shall consider the recommendation of the program administrator and the recommendation of the state attorney as to disposition of the pending charges. The court shall determine, by written finding, whether the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program. If the court finds that the defendant has not successfully completed the pretrial intervention program, the court may order the person to continue in education and treatment, which may include a mental health program offered by a licensed service provider, as defined in s. 394.455, or order that the charges revert to normal channels for prosecution. The court shall dismiss the charges upon a finding that the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program.
(9) The department may contract for the services and facilities necessary to operate pretrial intervention programs.
History.—s. 6, ch. 74-112; s. 1, ch. 75-301; s. 24, ch. 77-120; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 36, ch. 79-3; s. 1, ch. 80-329; s. 9, ch. 91-225; s. 6, ch. 91-280; s. 1, ch. 93-229; ss. 1688, 1689, ch. 97-102; s. 13, ch. 97-107; s. 123, ch. 99-3; s. 1, ch. 99-152; s. 3, ch. 2001-48; s. 16, ch. 2001-110; s. 6, ch. 2002-297; s. 8, ch. 2006-97; s. 5, ch. 2009-64; s. 18, ch. 2012-159; s. 114, ch. 2013-15; s. 17, ch. 2016-127; s. 2, ch. 2019-61; s. 64, ch. 2019-167; s. 5, ch. 2021-240; s. 2, ch. 2023-191.
Note.—Former s. 944.025.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 51
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: Reynaldo Castillo v. United States
Reynaldo Castillo v. United States (2016)
“Rather, the PTI program is a creation of Florida law that grants the state attorney the right to make a final determination as to whether the prosecution will continue, Fla. Stat. § 948.08 (5) (2013), and the Florida Supreme Court has recognized that admission to the PTI program…”
State v. Simons (2009)
“It is governed by section 948.08, Florida Statutes (2007), which gives the state complete discretion to administer the program.”
State v. Leukel (2008)
“Section 948.08(2) provides that any first offender or any person previously convicted of not more than one nonviolent misdemeanor, who is charged with any misdemeanor *294 or felony of the third-degree, is eligible for release to a pretrial intervention program on the approval…”
Hewlett v. State (1995)
“More importantly, we find part of the administrative order under review to conflict with section 948.08(6), the pretrial intervention statute.”
JAMES EVAN GINCLEY v. STATE OF FLORIDA (2019)
“Section 948.08, Florida Statutes, establishes various pretrial intervention programs within the State.”
State v. Upshaw (1995)
“Therefore, as the State routinely does, it could discretionarily drop or reduce Upshaw's charges to place Upshaw entirely within section 948.08, Florida Statutes. In conclusion, because the State offered and Upshaw accepted to enter the drug program, and because the State…”
Batista v. State (2007)
“Section 948.08, Florida Statutes, allows certain first offenders or persons convicted of not more than one non-violent misdemeanor or third-degree felony to be placed in PTI.”
State v. Turner (1994)
“Although, because of his prior multiple felony convictions, the state objected and notwithstanding that section 948.08(2), Florida Statutes (1993) [1] explicitly requires the consent of the state attorney, the "drug court" wrongly offered and Turner voluntarily agreed to his…”
Mullin v. Jenne (2005)
“See § 948.08(6), Fla. Stat. (1994). It provided an opportunity for eligible persons charged with possession and purchase of a controlled substance to participate in "a pretrial substance abuse education and treatment intervention program approved by the chief judge of the…”
Cox v. State (2010)
“See § 948.08(2), Fla. Stat. ("Any ... offender .”
Lloyd v. State (2004)
“In denying his motion, the trial court explained: "The defense's position is, to put it succinctly, that the defendant would be eligible *1228 to enter the PTI program under F.S. 948.08, even without the State's consent, because he is charged with offenses that are PTI eligible…”
King v. Nelson (1999)
“" See § 948.08(2) and (5), Fla. Stat. Compare Cleveland v.”
— 948.08(1) — 3 cases
S.K. v. State (2004)
SK v. State (2004)
— 948.08(2) — 16 cases
Cox v. State (2010)
“See § 948.08(2), Fla. Stat. ("Any ... offender .”
Johnson v. State (2001)
State v. Turner (1994)
“Although, because of his prior multiple felony convictions, the state objected and notwithstanding that section 948.08(2), Florida Statutes (1993) [1] explicitly requires the consent of the state attorney, the "drug court" wrongly offered and Turner voluntarily agreed to his…”
S.K. v. State (2004)
— 948.08(4) — 3 cases
State v. Simons (2009)
“It is governed by section 948.08, Florida Statutes (2007), which gives the state complete discretion to administer the program.”
State v. Rubel (1994)
— 948.08(5) — 5 cases
State v. Turner (1994)
“Although, because of his prior multiple felony convictions, the state objected and notwithstanding that section 948.08(2), Florida Statutes (1993) [1] explicitly requires the consent of the state attorney, the "drug court" wrongly offered and Turner voluntarily agreed to his…”
State v. Rubel (1994)
State v. Fitzgerald (1994)
State v. J.M. (2007)
— 948.08(5)(c) — 1 case
Batista v. State (2007)
“Section 948.08, Florida Statutes, allows certain first offenders or persons convicted of not more than one non-violent misdemeanor or third-degree felony to be placed in PTI.”
— 948.08(6) — 12 cases
Mullin v. Jenne (2005)
“See § 948.08(6), Fla. Stat. (1994). It provided an opportunity for eligible persons charged with possession and purchase of a controlled substance to participate in "a pretrial substance abuse education and treatment intervention program approved by the chief judge of the…”
Hewlett v. State (1995)
“More importantly, we find part of the administrative order under review to conflict with section 948.08(6), the pretrial intervention statute.”
JAMES EVAN GINCLEY v. STATE OF FLORIDA (2019)
“Section 948.08, Florida Statutes, establishes various pretrial intervention programs within the State.”
State v. Upshaw (1995)
“Therefore, as the State routinely does, it could discretionarily drop or reduce Upshaw's charges to place Upshaw entirely within section 948.08, Florida Statutes. In conclusion, because the State offered and Upshaw accepted to enter the drug program, and because the State…”
State v. Turner (1994)
“Although, because of his prior multiple felony convictions, the state objected and notwithstanding that section 948.08(2), Florida Statutes (1993) [1] explicitly requires the consent of the state attorney, the "drug court" wrongly offered and Turner voluntarily agreed to his…”
— 948.08(6)(a) — 14 cases
State v. Leukel (2008)
“Section 948.08(2) provides that any first offender or any person previously convicted of not more than one nonviolent misdemeanor, who is charged with any misdemeanor *294 or felony of the third-degree, is eligible for release to a pretrial intervention program on the approval…”
Lloyd v. State (2004)
“In denying his motion, the trial court explained: "The defense's position is, to put it succinctly, that the defendant would be eligible *1228 to enter the PTI program under F.S. 948.08, even without the State's consent, because he is charged with offenses that are PTI eligible…”
King v. Nelson (1999)
“" See § 948.08(2) and (5), Fla. Stat. Compare Cleveland v.”
JAMES EVAN GINCLEY v. STATE OF FLORIDA (2019)
“Section 948.08, Florida Statutes, establishes various pretrial intervention programs within the State.”
Hewlett v. State (1995)
“More importantly, we find part of the administrative order under review to conflict with section 948.08(6), the pretrial intervention statute.”
— 948.08(6)(b) — 6 cases
Walker v. Lamberti (2010)
— 948.08(6)(c) — 6 cases
Hewlett v. State (1995)
“More importantly, we find part of the administrative order under review to conflict with section 948.08(6), the pretrial intervention statute.”
State v. Leukel (2008)
“Section 948.08(2) provides that any first offender or any person previously convicted of not more than one nonviolent misdemeanor, who is charged with any misdemeanor *294 or felony of the third-degree, is eligible for release to a pretrial intervention program on the approval…”
— 948.08(6)(c)(1) — 1 case
Diaz v. State (2004)
— 948.08(6)(c)(2) — 1 case
State v. Upshaw (1995)
“Therefore, as the State routinely does, it could discretionarily drop or reduce Upshaw's charges to place Upshaw entirely within section 948.08, Florida Statutes. In conclusion, because the State offered and Upshaw accepted to enter the drug program, and because the State…”
— 948.08(7) — 3 cases
— 948.08(7)(a) — 2 cases
— 948.08(7)(c) — 2 cases
— 948.08(l) — 1 case
Harris v. Ryand, Director (2014)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.