D.A.H. v. State
212 So. 3d 399
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
2017
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

Appellant D.A.H. challenges his juvenile disposition, in which the trial court departed upwards from the Department of Juvenile Justice (“DJJ”) recommended disposition of probation and committed him to a non-seeure residential program, without requesting a restrictiveness level recommendation for this commitment from DJJ. The State concedes that this was reversible error. See E.A.R. v. State, 4 So.3d 614 (Fla. 2009); D.R. v. State, 178 So.3d 478, 479 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). We find that the issue was properly preserved. See H.D. v. Shore, 134 So.3d 1062, 1063 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); A.L.B. v. State, 23 So.3d 190 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009). We therefore reverse for a new disposition hearing.

Reversed and remanded.

Warner, Gerber and Kuntz, JJ., concur.