 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Barns v. State9/27/2000
urrently before the court and the violation, in the discretion of the court, supports a finding that no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons or assure the presence of the accused at trial. Ch. 2000-229, § 2, at 1708-09, Laws of Fla. (new statutory language underlined).
This amendment negates the holdings of Merdian and Metzger. Subsection 907.041(4)(b)7 allows the trial court the discretion to impose pretrial detention when faced with a defendant who violates a condition of pretrial release.
Application of the 2000 Amendments to this Case
It is proper to consider the 2000 legislation in arriving at the correct interpretation of the pretrial detention statute. See, e.g., Gamble v. State, 723 So. 2d 905, 907 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). As the supreme court has noted:
The rule seems to be well established [that] the interpretation of a statute by the legislative department goes far to remove doubt as to the meaning of the law. The court has the right and the duty, in arriving at the correct meaning of a prior statute, to consider subsequent legislation. Gay v. Canada Dry Bottling Co. of Florida, 59 So. 2d 788, 790 (Fla. 1952) (quoting General Petroleum Corp. of Cal. v. Smith, 157 P.2d 356, 360 (Ariz. 1945)).
In creating sections 903.0471 and 907.041(4)(b)7, the legislature used the term "pretrial detention" in a way that signifies that the term applies to a revocation of an existing bond. The language of the statute allows no other interpretation. It says that a court may "revoke pretrial release and order pretrial detention if the court finds probable cause to believe that the defendant committed a new crime while on pretrial release." Ch. 2000-178 § 3, at 1469, Laws. of Fla. Similarly, Chapter 2000-229 clarified that "pretrial detention" may be ordered when a "defendant has violated one or more conditions of pretrial release or bond for the offense currently before the court." Ch. 2000-229 § 2, at 1708-09, Laws of Fla.
The legislature also made it clear that this court's interpretation of the pretrial detention statute too severely limited the trial court's discretion on bond issues. The statutory changes plainly implement the trial court's discretion to impose pretrial detention within the limits of Article I, Section 14 of the Florida Constitution, which affords the trial judge wide latitude in the decision to deny bond:
If no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons, assure the presence of the accused at trial, or assure the integrity of the judicial process, the accused may be detained. Fla. Const. Art. I, § 14.
The legislative intent behind section 907.041 was not to narrow the breadth of the trial court's discretion under the state constitution, but to be coextensive with it.
Petitioner in this case is charged with DUI manslaughter. The trial court was justifiably concerned that the petitioner's inability to control his drinking presented a risk to the community. The constitution allows a judge, in deciding whether to impose pretrial detention, to consider whether a defendant's pretrial release will pose a threat of physical harm to persons in the community. In this case, the trial court made precisely the type of discretionary decision which the legislature intended that judges make under the pretrial detention statute.
For these reasons, we deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
STONE and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 Florida DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|