Wishbone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2009
- Messages
- 3,883
- Reaction score
- 18,567
I watched the end of the trail again. And I heard what ch13 heard. The judge replied, "if it's required, I certainly will." So there shouldn't be a need for an appeal. JMOI found some more recent cases that cited this as well (brief summary by me) for anyone else interested. Note- sorry I can’t link to a few of these cases as they are part of paid legal subscription database sites I use. I also only did a quick cursory search so this is fairly limited but I wanted to share.
1) 2020 case, Rodell Burton v State of FL; case 19-CF-1394 // defendant was found guilty, his defense asked for bond to remain pending sentencing, Judge denied. They appealed, appellate court ruled that “The trial court's order does not "state in writing its reasons for the denial" of the motion. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.691(b). The transcript of the December 11, 2020, hearing does not reflect that the trial court considered the criteria for post-trial release set forth in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.691(a) and Younghans v. State, 90 So. 2d 308 (Fla.1956), when reaching its decision. Within five days, the trial court shall reconsider the appellant's amended emergency motion for supersedeas/appeal bond.”
2) 2022 case, Richard Johnston v State of FL. Case 2021CF000174 // Defendant found guilty, defense sought bail/bond, Judge denied. They appealed, appellate Court ruled “This case is remanded to conduct a hearing and reconsider the appellant's motion for post-trial release, providing analysis as to the Youghans factors should the trial court find this appeal was taken in good faith.”
3) 2020 case, Wesley Brackin v State of FL; case 2D20-2650 // the defendant found guilty, defense motioned for a stay of the sentence; Judge denied. They appealed, appellate court ruled “The motion for review is granted. The trial court's order denying the appellant's motion for stay of sentence and motion for supersedeas bond is reversed. Neither the trial court's order nor the transcript of the December 21, 2020, hearing reflect that the trial court considered the criteria for post-trial release set forth in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.691(a) and Younghans v. State, 90 So. 2d 308 (Fla.1956). Within seven days, the trial court shall hold a hearing to reconsider the appellant's motion for stay of sentence and motion for supersedeas bond.”
TL;DR / short summary: I found 3 cases within the last 4 years that involved the case defense cited tonight in asking for her bond to remain and/or a stay. In these cases the appellate court ruled that the Judge/lower court did not consider the factors required for denying such a request and ordered the Court to go back and hold a hearing to reconsider what they previously summarily denied by the defense.
Does this mean that AB’s defense will be successful? Nope. But it does mean that the Court defense said they would appeal to, has already ruled in other cases that such a denial must have some specific findings or they’re going to send it right back for a hearing.
Hopefully the Judge will write this Order out and that would seemingly solve/avoid the appellate issues mentioned in the cases above.
At the end of this video you can clearly hear the judge say those words.