Armstrong v. State
The Sixth District addressed, apparently for the first time, constitutional challenges to newly amended section 907.041(5)(d), Florida Statutes, which mandates that the State or court move for pretrial detention when a defendant is charged with certain dangerous first-degree, life, or capital felonies. The court rejected both constitutional challenges (one unpreserved, one meritless on the merits) but granted habeas relief because neither judge below made the statutorily required findings of fact supporting pretrial detention, quashing the detention and release orders and remanding for a new hearing.
Key facts
- Armstrong was charged with dangerous first-degree, life, or capital felonies triggering the newly amended section 907.041(5)(d), which mandates that the State or court move for pretrial detention.
- The trial court entered a pretrial detention order, but neither the initial judge nor a successor judge made the statutorily required specific findings of fact supporting detention.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is likely one of the first appellate opinions construing the newly enacted mandatory pretrial-detention-motion provision of section 907.041(5)(d), rejecting facial constitutional attacks under Article I, Section 14… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.