The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLVII
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONS

Chapter 948
PROBATION AND COMMUNITY CONTROL

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 948.16

948.16 Misdemeanor pretrial substance abuse education and treatment intervention program; misdemeanor pretrial veterans’ treatment intervention program; misdemeanor pretrial mental health court program.—

(1)(a) A person who is charged with a misdemeanor and identified as having a substance abuse problem and who has not previously been convicted of a felony, is eligible for voluntary admission into a misdemeanor 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 based on the program requirements and the treatment plan for the offender, upon motion of either party or the court’s own motion, except, if the state attorney believes the facts and circumstances of the case suggest the defendant is involved in dealing and selling 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 dealing or selling controlled substances, the court shall deny the defendant’s admission into the pretrial intervention program.

(b) While enrolled in a pretrial intervention program authorized by this section, 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.

(2)(a) A veteran or a servicemember, as defined in s. 394.47891(2)(d) or (c), respectively, who is otherwise qualified to participate in a veterans treatment court program under s. 394.47891, and is charged with a misdemeanor is eligible for admission into a misdemeanor veterans treatment court program, for a period based on the program’s requirements and the treatment plan for the offender, pursuant to the requirements of s. 394.47891(4) and (8).

(b) While enrolled in a pretrial intervention program authorized by this section, 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 veterans and servicemembers. 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 misdemeanor pretrial veterans’ treatment intervention program or other pretrial intervention program. Any person whose charges are dismissed after successful completion of the misdemeanor pretrial veterans’ treatment intervention program, if otherwise eligible, may have his or her arrest record of the dismissed charges expunged under s. 943.0585.

(3) A defendant who is charged with a misdemeanor and identified as having a mental illness is eligible for voluntary admission into a misdemeanor pretrial mental health court program established pursuant to s. 394.47892, 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.

(4) 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 successfully completed the pretrial intervention program. Notwithstanding the coordinated strategy developed by a drug court team pursuant to s. 397.334(4) or by the veterans’ treatment intervention team, 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 or return the charges to the criminal docket for prosecution. The court shall dismiss the charges upon finding that the defendant has successfully completed the pretrial intervention program.

(5) Any public or private entity providing a pretrial substance abuse education and treatment program or mental health court program under this section shall contract with the county or appropriate governmental entity. The terms of the contract shall include, but not be limited to, the requirements established for private entities under s. 948.15(3). This requirement does not apply to services provided by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs or the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

History.—s. 4, ch. 2001-48; s. 9, ch. 2006-97; s. 6, ch. 2009-64; s. 1, ch. 2012-35; s. 19, ch. 2012-159; s. 115, ch. 2013-15; s. 36, ch. 2016-24; s. 18, ch. 2016-127; s. 3, ch. 2019-61; s. 6, ch. 2021-240; s. 68, ch. 2022-4; s. 3, ch. 2023-191.

F.S. 948.16 on Google Scholar

F.S. 948.16 on Casetext

Amendments to 948.16

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 948.16

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 948.16.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

STATE v. CENTER FOR DRUG- FREE LIVING, INC., 842 So. 2d 177 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . . § 948.16, Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

THE WEST VIRGINIA HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY, v. A. NORTON, D. WEST VIRGINIA COAL ASSOCIATION,, 238 F. Supp. 2d 761 (S.D.W. Va. 2003)

. . . With this caveat, we are removing the required amendment at 30 CFR 948.16(111). 67 Fed.Reg. 37614. . . . 30 C.F.R. § 948.16(111). . . . With this caveat, we are removing the required amendment at 30 CFR 948.16(111). 67 Fed.Reg. 37614. . . . (nnn) (West Virginia allows unjust hardship criterion); 948.16(ooo) (W. . . . This required program amendment is set forth at 30 C.F.R. § 948.16(111). . . .

WEST VIRGINIA HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY, v. A. NORTON, D., 190 F. Supp. 2d 859 (S.D.W. Va. 2002)

. . . . § 948.16(iii) and is consistent with the requirements of SMCRA and 30 C.F.R. § 800.11(e).” . . . The oldest required amendment was due November 26, 1985. 30 C.F.R. § 948.16(a). . . . The State has made no response to the OSM requirement codified at 948.16(oooo), which requires removal . . . OSM announced receipt on January 3, 2001 of amendments codified at 948.16(a), (dd), (ee), (oo), (tt), . . . On May 24, 2001 OSM announced receipt of amendments codified at 948.16(zzz), a duplicate, (nnnn), (ffff . . .

JONES, v. STATE, 813 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2002)

. . . See, e.g., §§ 948.08, 948.16, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . .

THE WEST VIRGINIA HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY, v. A. NORTON,, 161 F. Supp. 2d 676 (S.D.W. Va. 2001)

. . . . § 948.16(111); 60 Fed.Reg. at 51918. The State did nothing and OSM did nothing. . . .

THE WEST VIRGINIA HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY, v. A. NORTON, O., 137 F. Supp. 2d 687 (S.D.W. Va. 2001)

. . . . § 948.16(kkk); and 3) eliminate the deficit in the State’s alternative bonding system and ensure sufficient . . . including treatment of polluted water, at all existing and future bond forfeiture sites. 30 C.F.R. § 948.16 . . .

CAT RUN COAL CO. v. BABBITT,, 932 F. Supp. 772 (S.D.W. Va. 1996)

. . . . § 948.16(p) (1990) and 53 Fed. . . . . § 948.16(jjj) (1996) and 60 Fed.Reg. 51900, 51902 (Oct. 4, 1995); and (4) directed West Virginia to . . . to meet the Clean Water Act standards, at all existing and future bond forfeiture sites, 30 C.F.R. § 948.16 . . .

MERRETT, v. STATE, 670 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . § 948.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1993). Arnold v. State, 627 So.2d 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). . . .

In JOHN GRUSS CO. INC. JOHN GRUSS CO. INC. v. PARAGON ENERGY CORPORATION,, 22 B.R. 236 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1982)

. . . Paragon contends that such consequential damages total $35,-948.16. . . .