District Court Grants Writ Of Habeas Corpus In Dui Manslaughter Matter
In the matter of Ginsberg v.
In the matter of Ginsberg v.. Ryan, the 3rd District Court held as follows:
The Third District Court granted the defendant's petition for habeas corpus & remanded to the trial court for a hearing as to pretrial detention.
On April 29, 2010, defendant was charged with DUI causing serious bodily injury; felony DUI (third or subsequent conviction); battery on a law enforcement officer; and resisting a police officer with violence. At first appearance, the judge set bond of $25,000. Defendant, unable to post bond, requested an alternative pretrial release.
On June 18, 2010, the trial court granted pretrial release, conditioned on 24-hour, electronically monitored house arrest. The defendant was required, as a further condition of pretrial release, to stay at home and was allowed to leave only for scheduled & approved doctor appointments or to go to court. The trial court set an alternate bond of no bond.
On June 29, 2010, an affidavit of monitored release violation was filed, alleging the defendant left his residence without authorization and that the GPS monitoring device on defendant showed he went to a residential area & wasn't nearby a doctor's office, hospital, or pharmacy. The defendant was taken into custody.
At each of 3 subsequent hearings, the trial court denied the defendant's request to reinstate house arrest & denied the defendant's numerous requests to reinstate the bond. On March 28, 2011, the state made an ore tenus motion with the circuit court to deny any bond for the defendant. The circuit court permitted defendant to address the court on this issue after which it denied pretrial release along with the defendant's motion to set bond. The district court noted that the defendant had been in custody for more than nine months.
[randimg]
The 3rd District Court of Appeal stated that, under the Florida Constitution, a defendant charged with a crime is entitled to bond as a matter of right. If no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to people, assure the presence of the accused at trial, or otherwise assure the integrity of the judicial process, the defendant may be detained.
The state argued the defendant met criteria for pretrial confinement under section 907.041(4). The Third District Court explained that a court is required to consider the requirements of florida statute 907.041 and rules 3.131 and 3.132, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure prior to denying a motion for pretrial release. Specifically, the state must file a motion seeking pretrial detention within twenty-four hours of the defendant's arrest.
The district court explained that it's the state's burden to establish the necessity for pretrial incarceration, beyond a reasonable doubt. The state of florida agreed that provisions of the pretrial detention statute & Rules of Criminal Procedure weren't followed but urged the district court to affirm the trial court's ruling to detain the defendant as defendant was provided notice and an opportunity to be heard on his motion for pretrial release following the violation of defendant's monitored release.
The 3rd District Court found this argument without merit and stated that a defendant who violates a condition of his or her pretrial release gives up the right to continued release under the initial bond but doesn't give up totally the constitutional right to pretrial release. A trial court's authority to hold a defendant without any bond is restricted by florida statute 907.041 & the trial court must follow the pretrial detention statute, in addition to rules 3.131 and 3.132, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The Third District Court of Appeal held the state of florida and trial court failed to follow the statutory procedures as well as rules, & that such a failure can't be cured by the fact that the defendant might have been provided with notice & an opportunity to be heard prior to being denied bond. Consequently, the District Court granted defendant's petition for habeas corpus & remanded to the circuit court, directing that the state of florida had 3 business days to file a legally sufficient motion for pretrial detention.
by: renc84idla
Be Careful: Not All Agencies Are Funding Grants New Visa Norms For Skilled Migrants To Australia Offshore Experts Grants - The Response To Seeking Your Dream How Grants Are Of Great Help How To Get Double Glazing Grants? How To Get Double Glazing Grants? Migrants Pocket Canadian Permits Post Computer Glitch How Federal Grants Are Of Extreme Importance How To Donate Grants For Various Purposes? Return Of Obama: Good News For Immigrants Willing To Join The Field Of Information Technology The Immigrants In Canada May Be At A Disadvantageous Position Training For Grants Your Key To Get A Hassle Free Grant What Are Better Opportunity To Immigrants To Canada