B. P. v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledNovember 16, 2022
Docket2D21-3074
StatusPublished
๐ฐ News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
B.P.,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
No. 2D21-3074
November 16, 2022
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County;
Lawrence M. Lefler, Judge.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Stephania A.
Valantasis, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lindsay D.
Turner, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa; and Taylor A. Schell,
Assistant Attorney General, Tampa (substituted as counsel of
record), for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
B.P. appeals an order adjudicating him delinquent and placing
him on juvenile probation. The trial court also ordered him to pay
restitution. We affirm the adjudication and placement without
comment. However, we reverse the restitution order.
In entering the disposition and restitution order, the trial court
relied solely on the evidence introduced during the adjudicatory
hearing. Although B.P. had requested a separate restitution
hearing, the trial court did not conduct such a hearing before
entering the restitution order, despite B.P.'s objection that he had
no notice that the amount of restitution would be determined solely
on the evidence from the adjudicatory hearing.
While this appeal was pending, B.P. filed a motion pursuant to
Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.135(b)(2) requesting a
restitution hearing. Although the trial court held a hearing, the
motion was deemed denied because the trial court did not timely
rule on the motion. Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.135(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B); T.C. v.
State, 292 So. 3d 1273, 1274 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020).
"When restitution is ordered by the court, the amount of
restitution may not exceed an amount the child and the parent or
guardian could reasonably be expected to pay or make."
2
ยง 985.437(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2021). "Although a child need not have a
present ability to pay restitution, the court must make a finding as
to the juvenile's expected earning capacity prior to setting an
amount for restitution." A.C. v. State, 324 So. 3d 546, 546 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2020) (quoting S.S. v. State, 122 So. 3d 499, 503 (Fla. 4th DCA
2013)), rev'd State v. A.C., SC20-1831 (Fla. Aug. 6, 2021). Further,
if the court intends on ordering restitution based solely on evidence
adduced at the adjudicatory hearing, the child must be given
notice. J.G. v. State, 978 So. 2d 270, 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); L.S.
v. State, 975 So. 2d 554, 555 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).
The State concedes error; the trial court failed to make the
necessary findings and did not provide the requisite notice to B.P.
We agree.
Accordingly, we reverse the restitution order and remand for
entry of a new order consistent with this opinion. The trial court
may hold a new hearing, if necessary.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
NORTHCUTT, LaROSE, and LABRIT, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
3