Opinion

Thomas Benjamin Brown v. State of Florida

  • 264 So. 3d 1097
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
Feb 15, 2019
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 44.7%

The opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-0518

_____________________________

THOMAS BENJAMIN BROWN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Bruce Anderson, Judge.

February 15, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Thomas Benjamin Brown (“Brown”) appeals the denial of his

Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for

postconviction relief. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

In 2002, following a negotiated plea, Brown was convicted of

sexual battery and sentenced to seven years in prison, to be

followed by five years on sex offender probation. In 2013, he

admitted violating his probation and was sentenced to twenty-

five years in prison, to be followed by five years on probation,

which this Court affirmed in a prior appeal. Brown now files the

instant appeal after raising three claims in a postconviction

motion.

All claims raised by Brown relate to the fact that when he

was released from prison in 2009 to start his probation, he was

transferred to the Florida Civil Commitment Center, a secure

facility under the jurisdiction of the Department of Children and

Families. He alleges he never agreed to that “enhancement” of

his probationary sentence. In ground one, he alleges the trial

court lacked jurisdiction to revoke his probation because his

placement in the secure Civil Commitment Center was illegal. In

ground two, he argues his placement in the civil commitment

center violated his double jeopardy rights because it constitutes

an “enhancement” of his probationary term after it was imposed.

In ground three, Brown alleges counsel was ineffective for failing

to raise those issues and for allowing him to enter a plea to

violating his probation when his probation had not yet begun (as

he remained confined).

The supreme court has held that involuntary commitment

for sexual predators is a civil commitment, not a punishment.

See State v. Harris, 881 So. 2d 1079, 1083 (Fla. 2004). As such, a

plea agreement for incarceration followed by probation is not

violated when a defendant is civilly committed after his release

from incarceration. Id. The supreme court specifically rejected

the argument raised by Brown that by civilly committing him,

the State was adding a term to probation (i.e., requiring him to

complete “residential” sex offender treatment). Id. Additionally,

because the involuntary commitment of sexual predators is a civil

proceeding, not a criminal sentence or punishment, the

appellant’s civil commitment does not violate double jeopardy as

it does not represent an improper increase in his sentence after it

has been imposed. See Westerheide v. State, 831 So. 2d 93, 99-104

(Fla. 2002). Finally, contrary to his assertions, Brown was on

probation while in the secure facility. This Court has noted, “a

period of probation shall commence immediately upon the release

of the defendant from incarceration.” Walker v. State, 604 So. 2d

913, 914 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (internal quotation and citation

omitted). Because the civil commitment is not a sentence or

incarceration, his probation started immediately upon the

expiration of his seven-year incarcerative sentence and his

transfer to the civil commitment facility.

2

The conclusion that probation starts as soon as a defendant

is released to a civil commitment is further supported by section

948.012(6), Florida Statutes. In 2014, the subsection was

amended to indicate probation or supervision was to be tolled

while a defendant was civilly committed. That section is effective

for defendants whose “sentences of probation or community

control begin[s] on or after October 1, 2014.” §947-012(6), Fla.

Stat. (2014). Here, Brown began his probation in 2009. Thus,

prior to 2014, defendants were on probation as soon as they were

released to civil commitment under the jurisdiction of the

Department of Children and Families. Accordingly, the trial

court had jurisdiction to revoke his probation.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and M.K. THOMAS, J., concur; ROWE, J.,

concurs in result only.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or

9.331.

_____________________________

Thomas Benjamin Brown, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.