S.B.L. v. State, 737 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Cases | S.B.L. v. State, 737 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999) | 2018

The appellant’s son was adjudicated for having burglarized a dwelling and the appellant was ordered to pay restitution. On appeal, the appellant made two arguments, including that her right to due process was violated when the trial court ordered her to pay restitution when she had had no meaningful opportunity to be heard at the restitution hearing; she received a “witness subpoena [that] said it was for a restitution hearing, but gave no indication that appellant would be anything other than a witness at the restitution hearing.” The court of appeals held that “[w]hile there is no single inflexible test by which a court determines whether the requirements of due process have been met, the proceeding in this case in no way comported with fundamental fairness.” The order was reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

[NOTE: Fla. Stat. § 985.231 referred to in this case summary is no longer in effect.]