Christopher PERAZA, Petitioner,
v.
Rick BRADSHAW, Sheriff of Palm Beach County, and the State of Florida, Respondents.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Kevin R. Anderson of Anderson & Welch, L.L.C., West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mitchell A. Egber, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for respondent State of Florida.
WARNER, J.
Petitioner Christopher Peraza requests that this court issue a writ of habeas corpus to release him from custody and reinstate bail for his probation violation case. A first appearancе judge had set bail which was later revoked by the original sentencing judge. We hold that the sentencing judge had authority to revoke bail set by a first appearance judge. Therefore, we deny the writ.
*505 Peraza was placed on drug offender prоbation for the crimes of possession of cocaine and marijuana. While on probation, Peraza was arrested on April 25, 2007, for trafficking in oxycodone. He was brought before a first appearance judge on the same datе, and the judge released him under a supervised recognizance program. Bеfore his release from jail was complete, his probation officer рrepared and filed an affidavit of violation of probation. An arrest/notice to appear form was prepared by the Department of Corrеctions and signed by the probation officer. Pursuant to the arrest report, Peraza was brought before another first appearance judge the next day. Thаt judge set a bond of $5,000, and Peraza was released. He was not returned to the judgе who committed him to probation.
Five months later, Peraza came for a рreliminary violation of probation hearing before the judge who had committed him to probation. That judge sua sponte revoked the bond because Peraza was arrеsted for trafficking in drugs while he was already on probation for a drug charge. From thаt order, Peraza petitions for relief.
Probation is an act of grace to a defendant convicted of a crime. See Kaduk v. State,
Because this was an arrest for a рrobation violation rather than a new crime, we conclude that Florida Rulе of Criminal Procedure 3.131 does not apply. Rule 3.131(a) starts with the premise that a person charged with an offense is entitled to pretrial release on reаsonable conditions. Probationers are not entitled to pretrial release, аnd thus they are not entitled to all of the protections of rule 3.131.
To allow a probationer to obtain a bond from a first appearance judge, who has little, if any, knowledge of the case, would deprive the judge or court which impоsed the sentence from determining, in its discretion, the appropriate relеase provisions pending a final hearing on the probation. Because the probationer is only on probation as an act of grace of the sеntencing court, the sentencing court has the discretion to grant or deny bail pending the revocation hearing. A first appearance judge has the authority to set bail only pending a further hearing before the sentencing court. See § 948.06(4), Fla. Stat. (2006) (wherе probationer is arrested, taken before a court in the county in which he or she is arrested and denies a violation of probation, the court may release the probationer with or without bail "to await further hearing").
Peraza was already on probation for drug charges, and he was arrested for another drug offense in direct violation of the terms of his probation. This was no technical violation of the conditions of his probation. We think it is well within the discretion of the sentencing court to refuse his continued release. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining not to continue Peraza on bail.
STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.