K.R. v. State

973 So. 2d 1170, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 13433
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 31, 2007·No. No. 1D06-5915·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The State concedes that the trial court erred by disregarding the recommendation of the Department of Juvenile Justice that Appellant remain on probation. Instead, the trial court adjudicated Appellant delinquent and committed him to a moderate risk facility, and failed to state its reasons on the record for deviating from the Department’s recommendation. See § 985.23(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006). Additionally, it failed to reference the characteristics of a moderate risk placement vis-a-vis Appellant’s needs. Failure to do so constitutes reversible error. See C.C.B. v. State, 828 So.2d 429, 431 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (explaining “[t]he trial court must not only state its reasons for disregarding the recommended restrictiveness level on the rec[1171] ord, the reasons must also be supported by a preponderance of the evidence and must make reference to the characteristics of the restrictiveness level vis-a-vis the needs of the child.”). Accordingly, we reverse the disposition order and remand for a new disposition hearing. C.M.K. v. State, 855 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, HAWKES and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

K.R. v. State, 973 So. 2d 1170, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 13433 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

973 So. 2d 1170 (K.R. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

D.D.M. v. State
979 So. 2d 1131 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
KR v. State
973 So. 2d 1170 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)