S.T. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

S.T. v. State

8 So. 3d 1153, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2729, 2009 WL 886308

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 3, 2009

DocketNo. 1D08-5093

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 So. 3d 1153 (S.T. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

S.T. v. State, 8 So. 3d 1153, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2729, 2009 WL 886308 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s juvenile disposition order which withheld adjudication of delinquency failed to specify the length of the appellant’s two terms of probation, including whether they are to be served consecutively or concurrently. The appellant was entitled to be informed of the length of her probation. See N.W. v. State, 767 So.2d 446 (Fla.2000); J.M.W. v. State, 935 So.2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Because the trial court did not file its order ruling on the appellant’s Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.135(b)(2) mo[1154]*1154tion to clarify the disposition order until more than thirty days after the motion was filed, the amended final disposition order filed January 9, 2009, is a nullity. See D.D.M. v. State, 979 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); O.H. v. State, 948 So.2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). Thus, the disposition order is reversed and the case is remanded for entry of a corrected order.

ALLEN, WOLF, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s juvenile disposition order which withheld adjudication of delinquency failed to specify the length of the appellant’s two terms of probation, including whether they are to be served consecutively or concurrently. The appellant was entitled to be informed of the length of her probation. See N.W. v. State, 767 So.2d 446 (Fla.2000); J.M.W. v. State, 935 So.2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Because the trial court did not file its order ruling on the appellant’s Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.135(b)(2) mo[1154]*1154tion to clarify the disposition order until more than thirty days after the motion was filed, the amended final disposition order filed January 9, 2009, is a nullity. See D.D.M. v. State, 979 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); O.H. v. State, 948 So.2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). Thus, the disposition order is reversed and the case is remanded for entry of a corrected order.

ALLEN, WOLF, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 So. 3d 1153, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2729, 2009 WL 886308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack