Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

Ralph HAWKER, Carlos Pumarejo and Hershel Meadows, Petitioners, v. Warden Lawrence GREER, South Bay Correctional Institution, Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We consolidate petitioners' three petitions for writ of habeas corpus through which they seek their immediate release from detention under the Jimmy Ryce Act. See §§ 394.910-.931, Fla. Stat. (2001). The trial court vacated the initial, ex parte probable cause determinations in each case based on Melvin v. State, 26 Fla. L. Weekly D2733, 804 So.2d 460, 2001 WL 1448749 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 16, 2001) (concluding that the Jimmy Ryce Act's ex parte probable cause determination must be supported by sworn proof in the form of a verified petition or affidavit). The state has not sought review of that ruling through its own petition, so the ruling is not before us for review.

Petitioners, however, seek review of the court's decision to allow the state nine days to amend its petition to conform with Melvin's requirements. Petitioners argue that because there is no valid probable cause determination now existing, they are entitled to immediate release. We disagree based on Johnson v. Department of Children and Family Services, 747 So.2d 402, 403 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), in which this court allowed the state seventy-two hours to file a sufficient multidisciplinary team report when the ex parte probable cause determination had been based on an insufficient report. See also Valdez v. Moore, 745 So.2d 1009, 1011 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (allowing a five-day cure time where the state had not held the adversarial preliminary hearing within five days of detention). Also, we find that the nine-day length of the curing period — which includes a four-day holiday weekend — is not an unreasonable amount of time. We, therefore, deny the petitions.

WARNER, FARMER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HAWKER v. GREER
(Nov 29, 2001)