Derek Benoit v. Kurt A. Hoffman, Sheriff of Sarasota County
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledApril 26, 2023
Docket2D2023-0708
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
DEREK BENOIT,
Petitioner,
v.
KURT A. HOFFMAN, SHERIFF OF SARASOTA COUNTY,
Respondent.
No. 2D23-708
April 26, 2023
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the Circuit Court for Sarasota
County; Andrea McHugh, Judge.
Larry L. Eger, Public Defender, and Aaron Getty, Assistant Public
Defender, Sarasota, for Petitioner.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sonia C. Lawson,
Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Respondent.
KHOUZAM, Judge.
Derek Benoit filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging
his detention after the revocation of his pretrial release. Because the
judge presiding over Mr. Benoit's first appearance in one case did not
have authority to revoke his bond in a separate case, we grant the
petition.
Mr. Benoit was arrested and charged with fleeing to elude in case
number 22-CF-13079. Judge Donna Padar was assigned to that case;
Mr. Benoit posted bond and was released. A few months later, Mr.
Benoit was arrested and charged with misdemeanor battery in case
number 23-MM-2996. Judge Andrea McHugh was the assigned judge.
At Mr. Benoit's first appearance, the State orally moved to revoke his
bond in the earlier case, 22-CF-13079, and Judge McHugh revoked the
bond.
Mr. Benoit claims, and we agree, that pursuant to Florida Rule of
Criminal Procedure 3.131, Judge McHugh lacked authority to revoke his
pretrial release in case number 22-CF-13079 because the case had been
assigned to another judge. Our recent opinion in Little v. Gualtieri, 353
So. 3d 675 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022), is instructive. In Little, the emergency
duty judge revoked the defendant's bond based on "oral motion and
testimony" alleging that the defendant had consumed alcohol about
fifteen days earlier in violation of his pretrial release conditions. Id. at
676. We held that under rule 3.131(d), the duty judge lacked the
authority to revoke the bond because the case was already assigned to a
trial judge and there was no exigency. Id. at 677. Rule 3.131(d) provides
in pertinent part:
No judge or a court of equal or inferior jurisdiction may
modify or set a condition of release, unless the judge:
(A) imposed the conditions of bail or set the amount of bond
required;
(B) is the chief judge of the circuit in which the defendant is
to be tried;
(C) has been assigned to preside over the criminal trial of the
defendant; or
(D) is the first appearance judge and was authorized by the
judge initially setting or denying bail to modify or set
conditions of release.
2
"[T]he rule does not empower an alternate judge such as an emergency
duty judge to 'modify or set a condition of release.' " Little, 353 So. 3d at
677 (quoting Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.131(d)).
The State's reliance on Parker v. State, 843 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2003),
is misplaced. In Parker, the defendant had been arrested and released
on bond in one case when he was subsequently arrested for a new crime.
Id. at 873. As here, the defendant's bond was revoked in the earlier case.
Id. But in Parker, that was done at a hearing in the older case by the
judge overseeing that case. Id. The facts here, in which the judge on the
subsequent case revoked bond in the earlier case, are distinguishable.
In accordance with Little and rule 3.131(d), we conclude that the
first appearance judge in the instant case lacked the authority to revoke
Mr. Benoit's pretrial release in case number 22-CF-13079. The petition
for writ of habeas corpus is granted to the extent that Mr. Benoit's
pretrial release conditions in case number 22-CF-13079 shall be
reinstated without prejudice to the State filing an appropriate motion to
revoke pretrial release.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is granted.
VILLANTI and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
3