Loading…
5 verbatim mandatory provisions from AO 2014-008.
Third Judicial Circuit (Columbia, Dixie, Hamilton, Lafayette, Madison, Suwannee, Taylor). Check the order's own effective and rescission dates before relying on it. Procedural information only; not legal advice.
Verbatim from the order's own text layer, harvested 2026-07-25; whitespace normalised only. No OCR. Only sentences carrying mandatory language are reproduced — the full order is in custody and is the controlling text. • Rather than have all Ryce Act proceedings be assigned as part of the ciyil docket under the General Assignment Order issued by the Chief Judge, a new circuit level judicial assignment shall be created to handle ceitain Ryce Act proceedings. • This assignment shall be referred to as a Status Review for Ryce Act Proceedings. 2. • It is anticipated however that the need for hearing time oritside of the quaiterly hearing date shall be rare and only when justified by tlie circumstances 5, Court Administration shall designate, in consultation with the Court, the Office of the State Attoniey, and the Office of the Public Defender, the place, time, and date for the quarterly Status Review liearings. 6. • Tlie initial judge assigned to tlie Status Review for Ryce Act Proceedings docket shall the next General Assignment Order or fiirtlier order of tlie Chief Judge. 7, Because clianges in the Ryce Act statutes l'iave greatly broadened the number of persons subject to Ryce Act proceedings, by allowing Ryce Act proceedings to be initiated against persons in the custody of county detention facilities as well as the Department of Corrections, attorneys of tlie criminal defense bar as well as attomeys of the State Attorney's office are strongly urged to inform all persons who are facing ari incarcerative sentence of their potential exposure to Ryce Act proceedings where appropriate. • State, 793 So.2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) mal<es it clear that when entering a plea tl':iat may subject someone to the possibility of commitment rmder the Act, tlie possibility of such a commitment is considered a 3 -- 3 of 4 -- collateral conseqrience of the plea and neither the trial court nor counsel is required to advise the defendant of such a collateral consequence, the judges of this circuit urge, but do not require, that the judge, as well as counsel for the defendant and for the State, both in appropriate misdemeanor cases as well as felony cases to be mindful of this collateral conseqrience and to address it as a part of the plea.
Rather than have all Ryce Act proceedings be assigned as part of the ciyil docket under the General Assignment Order issued by the Chief Judge, a new circuit level judicial assignment shall be created to handle ceitain Ryce Act proceedings.
Reviewer note: Document sha256: 6587f856a1a6d67ef3a1655f287a961a0e15263a07fe90791d214b3a23bea78f (143419 bytes).
25 verbatim mandatory provisions from AO 2022-004.
10 verbatim mandatory provisions from AO 2014-025.
The 17th Circuit's circuit-wide AI disclosure/certification mandate (Jan 2026, twice amended) was VACATED in its entirety effective June 15, 2026 by Chief Judge Phillips's AO 2026-19-Gen, expressly citing the statewide framework (AOSC26-12; Rule 2.515(d)(2), SC2026-0673). Several division procedure pages still cite the vacated order.