Amendments to 916.145

1. State v. Benninghoff

   188 So. 3d 64 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 2 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   Similarly, section 916.145, Florida Statutes, provides:

   PAGE 67
2. State v. Morris

   297 So. 3d 594 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 2 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   § 916.145, Fla. Stat. (1998).

   PAGE 599
3. State v. Carey

   212 So. 3d 448 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 1 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   In sum, while the court below was authorized to "discharge" Appellee from her responsibility to further comply with the obligation to report to the court under her conditional release plan, and to "terminate its jurisdiction" to enforce that plan, it was not authorized to dismiss the charges against Appellee, because five years had not elapsed since she was determined incompetent to proceed. See Mosher v. State , 876 So.2d 1230, 1232 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) ("The trial court correctly ruled that Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.213 and section 916.145, by their plain language, relate to the dismissal of charges at any time after five years have elapsed from the time the person is determined incompetent to proceed. Because the five-year period of time has not yet passed, we find no error in the trial court's ruling that the charges against Mosher should not yet be dismissed pursuant to Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.213 and section 916.145. "); see also State v. Benninghoff , 188 So.3d 64, 67 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ("Cases reviewing the dismissal of charges, pursuant to section 916.145, Florida Statutes, and rule 3.213 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure have uniformly and…

   PAGE 452
4. Anthony v. State

   No. 5D21-1536 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2021)

   • Motion to dismiss

   While section 916.145(1) also provides for dismissal after three years, Anthony was charged with a forcible felony, thus requiring five years to elapse before dismissal under that statute. See § 916.145(1)(p), Fla. Stat.

   PAGE 5
5. Mosher v. State

   876 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 19 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   The trial court correctly ruled that Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.213 and section 916.145, by their plain language, relate to the dismissal of charges at any time after five years have elapsed from the time the person is determined incompetent to proceed. Because the five-year period of time has not yet passed, we find no error in the trial court's ruling that the charges against Mosher should not yet be dismissed pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.213 and section 916.145. We reject Mosher's argument thatJackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 (1972), requires dismissal of the charges. The Court in Jackson specifically did not address the disposition of charges. 406 U.S. at 739. However, we agree with Mosher that Jackson requires that either civil commitment proceedings be instituted or she be released. The Court in Jackson held:

   PAGE 1232
6. State v. Everette

   911 So. 2d 119 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 4 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   Section 916.145, which has since been renumbered to section 916.303(a), Florida Statutes (2003), required the dismissal of charges against a defendant who is adjudicated incompetent to stand trial two years after such adjudication. § 916.145, Fla. Stat. (1996). Moreover, section 916.13, Florida Statutes (1996), required that "if criminal charges are subsequently dropped and the client is involuntarily admitted to retardation residential services, the placement at the secure facility may be continued if so ordered by the committing court following a hearing with the same due process requirements as set out in s. 393.11 for an initial involuntary admission." § 916.13(b), Fla. Stat. (1996). Currently, section 916.303, Florida Statutes (2003), provides that if charges against an incompetent defendant are dismissed, the department, the state attorney, or the defendant's attorney may ask the trial court to involuntarily commit the defendant pursuant to section 393.11, Florida Statutes. § 916.303(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003). Consequently, Mr. Everette is clearly a "forensic client," within the meaning of section 916.106(7), Florida Statutes (2003), i.e., a "defendant who…

   PAGE 121
7. McCray v. State

   200 So. 3d 1296 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 2 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   To the extent the petition seeks relief from that portion of the trial court's order denying dismissal of the information, it is denied based on a failure to show a departure from the essential requirements of law because fewer than five years have elapsed since the original determination that Mr. McCray was incompetent to proceed due to mental illness. See § 916.145; Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.213(a)(1) ; State v. Benninghoff, 188 So.3d 64, 67 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (providing a collection of cases that stand for the proposition that “[c]ases reviewing the dismissal of charges, pursuant to section 916.145, Florida Statutes, and rule 3.213 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure have uniformly and consistently enforced the five-year requirement before dismissal”).

   PAGE 1297
8. Department of Children & Families v. Wehrwein

   942 So. 2d 947 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 6 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   Section 916.145, Florida Statutes (2005) provides:
9. Nerette v. State

   324 So. 3d 523 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021)   Cited 1 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   I concur in the majority's denial of the petition for writ of certiorari and write to address the distinction between this case and State v. Morris , 297 So. 3d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020). Petitioner contends that Morris stands for the proposition that no hearing was necessary in this case because by legal presumption petitioner remained incompetent for a period of one year. Thus, he argues he had a right to dismissal of his charges under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.213(a)(1). Morris , however, was based on section 916.145, Florida Statutes (2019), which provides that charges against a defendant adjudicated incompetent to proceed shall be dismissed after five years of continuous incompetence, unless the court specifies its reasons for believing the defendant will become competent. Under the statute, the court does not need to make a finding of continued incompetency. However, under rule 3.213(a)(1), the misdemeanor charges shall be dismissed after one year of a finding of incompetency, "provided that the court finds that the defendant remains incompetent to stand trial ...." Thus, the court is required to make a finding of incompetency to authorize dismissal under…

   PAGE 527
10. McCray v. State

    230 So. 3d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 3 times

    • Motion to dismiss

    Following our opinion in McCray, the trial court conducted a hearing and entered the order that prompted the instant certiorari proceeding (Petition II). The order before us: (1) struck the prior order placing Mr. McCray on conditional release pursuant to section 916.17 ; (2) imposed many of those same conditions relying on rule 3.212(d) ; and (3) denied Mr. McCray's renewed motion to dismiss pursuant to section 916.145.