West Palm Beach Criminal Lawyer Blog : Ronald Chapman: West Palm Beach Criminal Lawyer | Florida Criminal Attorney: DUI, Assault & Battery, Felonies | Criminal Law Firm

          In 2008, the Chief Judge in Palm Beach County Florida signed Administrative Order Number 10.102-9/08 which automatically dismisses the following types of cases:

          1.  All criminal-traffic cases that have had no court activity for the past 5 years.  (Such cases include driving a motor vehicle without a valid driver's license, reckless driving [unless serious bodily injury occurred], and leaving the scene of an accident [not involving death or personal injuries]).

          2.  All violation of probation cases related to #1 that have had no court activity for the past 5 years.

          3.  All driving under the influence cases (DUI cases) that have had no court activity for the past 8 years.

          4.  Cases in which the Palm Beach County Clerk of Court receives documents proving that a defendant is dead (such as a death certificate).

          Also, as stated in a related article that I posted several days ago:

[T]his order goes on to state that if the Clerk of Court fails to dismiss one of the above-mentioned types of cases, a defendant is not entitled to have his case dismissed simply by filing a motion with the court.  In fact, if a defendant were to do so, the court could actually reactivate his case and set it for trial.

 

So what should you do if you believe that your case ought to be dismissed because it has been inactive for several years?  For one thing, do not file anything in writing with the judge or clerk.  That may well result in your case being reactivated.  Instead, contact a criminal defense lawyer for advice about how to proceed and hopefully get your case dismissed.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

          In 2008, the Chief Judge in Palm Beach County Florida signed Administrative Order 4.605-9/08 which automatically dismisses the following types of cases:

          1.  All nontraffic-related misdemeanor cases (for example, battery cases or trespassing cases) that have had no court activity for the past 5 years.

          2.  All violation of probation cases related to #1 that have had no court activity for the past 5 years.

          3.  All driving under the influence cases (DUI cases) that have had no court activity for the past 8 years.

          4.  Cases in which the Palm Beach County Clerk of Court receives documents proving that an accused individual is dead (for example, a death certificate).

          However, this order goes on to state that if the Clerk of Court fails to dismiss one of the above-mentioned types of cases, a defendant is not entitled to have his case dismissed simply by filing a motion with the court.  In fact, if a defendant were to do so, the court could actually reactivate his case and set it for trial.

          So what should you do if you believe that your case ought to be dismissed because it has been inactive for several years?  For one thing, do not file anything in writing with the judge or clerk.  That may well result in your case being reactivated.  Instead, contact a criminal defense lawyer for advice about how to proceed and hopefully get your case dismissed.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

          It has long been the law in Florida that a person's probation cannot be violated based solely upon hearsay.  This particular rule of law was at issue in the case of Lewis v. State of Florida which was decided in 2008 by Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal.

          In the Lewis case, Monica Lewis was initially placed on probation for the crime of felony petit theft.  However, Ms. Lewis's probation officer later filed an affidavit of violation of probation alleging that Lewis had been arrested twice while on probation and that she had failed to provide her probation officer with that information when asked.

          In attempting to prove that Ms. Lewis had in fact violated the conditions of her probation, the prosecutor presented the following evidence at Lewis's probation violation hearing:

• The orders of supervision in Lewis's case;
• A written monthly probation report; and
• An arrest affidavit which stated that Lewis had stolen merchandise valued at over $259.00 from Home Depot.

          Lewis's most recent probation officer also testified to the following at that same hearing:

• She speculated that Ms. Lewis's prior probation officer had instructed Lewis about her probationary conditions;
• She was not present when Lewis had allegedly signed the monthly probation report that was admitted into evidence;
• Lewis told her that she had not been arrested;
• The probation officer had reviewed a police report which stated that Lewis had been arrested.  However, she was not physically present when that arrest occurred; and
• She discovered that Lewis had a pending charge in Dade County.

          Not surprisingly, given all this evidence, the judge deciding the case ruled that Lewis had indeed violated her probation and sentenced her to three years in prison.

          On appeal, however, the appellate court that reviewed Ms. Lewis's case ruled that the lower-court judge erred when he held that Lewis had violated her probation because "only hearsay evidence was presented to prove [that Lewis] had been arrested for new charges.  The probation officer based her testimony on supposition, the probable cause affidavit, and the court file.  She had no personal knowledge of the alleged new arrest."

         Although Ms. Lewis won her case on appeal, her victory may be short-lived.  That is because the court of appeal sent her case back to the trial court with instructions that the prosecutor could once again try to prove that Lewis violated her probation as long as her probationary term had not yet expired.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks