## Facts

- Four juveniles (S.C.W., W.S.T., J.A., and E.G.) were taken into custody for alleged delinquent acts, processed at a juvenile assessment center, and then released.
- After the releases, the State filed delinquency petitions.
- The State sent each juvenile a notice of hearing, a summons, and a copy of the petition by first-class mail to the juvenile’s “last known address” provided at arrest.
- None of the juveniles appeared for arraignment.
- The State moved for orders to take the juveniles into custody (pickup orders) under § 985.207, Florida Statutes (1997).
- The trial court refused, concluding it lacked lawful authority to issue pickup orders for juveniles no longer in custody who had not been formally served.
- The State sought extraordinary relief in the district court of appeal to compel issuance of the pickup orders.

## Issues

1. Whether “proper notice” permitting a pickup order under § 985.207(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997), is satisfied by first-class mail when a juvenile was released before a delinquency petition was filed and did not receive a notice to appear under Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.045.
2. Whether, assuming proper notice and a failure to appear, § 985.207 requires a trial court to issue a pickup order or leaves issuance to judicial discretion.

## Decision

- The court denied the State’s petitions for certiorari or mandamus.
- First-class mail did not constitute “proper notice” under § 985.207(1)(c) in these circumstances.
- Even when a juvenile is properly noticed and fails to appear, § 985.207 authorizes but does not require issuance of a pickup order; the trial court may decline.
- Because the requested act was discretionary and the statutory notice requirement was not met on these facts, the appellate court would not compel pickup orders.

## Legal Principles

- When a juvenile is released from custody before a delinquency petition is filed and does not receive a Rule 8.045 notice to appear, “proper notice” under § 985.207(1)(c) is not established by first-class mail alone.
- Section 985.207 is permissive as to taking a child into custody for failure to appear after proper notice; issuance of a pickup order is within the trial court’s discretion.
- Mandamus is unavailable to compel an act that is discretionary rather than ministerial.

## Conclusion

The appellate court left in place the trial court’s refusal to issue juvenile pickup orders, holding that first-class mailed summonses were insufficient “proper notice” in this procedural posture and that § 985.207 does not impose a mandatory duty to order custody even after a properly noticed failure to appear.


State v. S.C.W., 718 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)