Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2003

D.B. v. State

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided July 7, 2003 · Cope, Nesbitt, Shevin

848 So. 2d 1219; 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 10225 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

KM v. Department of Juvenile Justice (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
NS v. Flowers (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)
KE v. Department of Juvenile Justice (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)
TDS v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
FH v. Dobuler (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
CDT v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
C.D.T. v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
T.D.S. v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
M.D. v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
DB v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Confession of Error

PER CURIAM.

D.B. petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, seeking release from home detention care with an electronic monitor. In its response, the State confesses error. The State acknowledges that D.B. does not qualify for home detention based on the risk assessment instrument. See § 985.213(2), Fla. Stat. (2002). The statute permits a more restrictive placement than that indicated by the risk assessment instrument, but to do so, “the court shall state, in writing, clear and convincing reasons for such placement.” Id. § 985.215(2)(j). No such reasons were given in this case. Accordingly we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and direct that D.B. be released from home detention. See K.C. v. Taylor, 696 So.2d 858 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); D.G.H. v. Gnat, 682 So.2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); cf. R.G. v. State, 817 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) *1220(discussing statute). The court may revisit the issue if there is a basis to do so.

Petition granted.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.