Given all the changes to Florida's pretrial detention system over the past year, we thought it might be helpful to summarize and synthesize the new rules and explain how they impact criminal defense practitioners. Three waves of legislative and procedural changes have narrowed the path to release for anyone charged with a "dangerous crime." First appearances now carry more weight. Timelines have compressed. And for certain defendants, the law presumes detention.
The three waves of change
January 1, 2024: House Bill 1627 amended Section 907.041, Florida Statutes. It expanded the "dangerous crimes" list, stripped judges of discretion to grant non-monetary release at first appearance, and mandated that prosecutors seek detention in serious cases.
February 13, 2025: The Legislature added provisions targeting defendants determined to be "unauthorized aliens" charged with forcible felonies. These defendants now face a rebuttable presumption favoring detention.
May 1, 2025: The Florida Supreme Court revised Rule 3.132 to conform to the statutory changes. The new rule details procedures from first appearance through detention hearings.
Together, these changes mark a philosophical shift. The Legislature has moved from a system that presumed release toward one that, for many defendants, presumes detention.
The "dangerous crimes" list has expanded
Florida law now identifies 26 offenses as "dangerous crimes" triggering special detention procedures. The 2024 legislation added DUI manslaughter, BUI manslaughter, fentanyl trafficking, extortion, and written threats to kill. The full list also includes murder, sexual battery, robbery, carjacking, home invasion robbery, kidnapping, aggravated battery, aggravated assault, burglary, stalking, and aircraft piracy.
Classification as a "dangerous crime" matters because it triggers a cascade of consequences that make pretrial release far harder to obtain.
No more discretionary release at first appearance
Before 2024, a judge at first appearance had discretion. Even for serious charges, the judge could consider electronic monitoring, house arrest, or a recognizance bond. That discretion is gone.
Under the new law, if you're arrested for a dangerous crime and the court finds probable cause, you cannot receive non-monetary pretrial release at first appearance. No ankle monitors. No house arrest without bond. No recognizance bonds. Release requires posting a monetary bond at or above the statewide uniform schedule—and judges can only increase amounts, not reduce them.
First appearance is no longer a realistic opportunity to walk out the door on a dangerous crime charge unless you can post substantial cash or a surety bond immediately.
Mandatory detention motions
Here's where the 2024 changes bite hardest. For dangerous crimes that are capital felonies, life felonies, or first-degree felonies, the state attorney "shall" file a motion for pretrial detention.
This mandatory language removes prosecutorial discretion. Previously, prosecutors could evaluate a case and decide whether detention was appropriate. Now, the filing is automatic for qualifying offenses. And the court can file a detention motion on its own initiative.
The unauthorized alien presumption
The February 2025 amendments added a new wrinkle. Under revised Rule 3.132(f)(2), if the court determines at first appearance that probable cause exists for a forcible felony and a preponderance of evidence shows the defendant is an unauthorized alien, the court "must presume that the defendant presents a substantial flight risk" and "must order pretrial detention."
This presumption is rebuttable. The defendant can present evidence that appropriate release conditions will ensure trial appearance. But the burden has shifted: the defendant must prove he is not a flight risk, rather than the state proving he is.
If the defendant successfully rebuts the presumption, the court must then consider the criteria in Section 903.046, Florida Statutes, along with any other relevant facts, to determine bail or other conditions.
Compressed timelines leave little room for preparation
The new rules compress the timeline for pretrial detention proceedings. The detention hearing must occur within five days of first appearance (or within five days of arraignment if the state files its motion later). A defendant may request a continuance, but only for up to five additional days, and only for good cause. The court must issue its written order within 24 hours of the hearing.
When a person is arrested for a crime for which pretrial detention could be ordered, the arresting agency may hold the defendant before first appearance for up to 24 hours. At first appearance, if the state announces it intends to file a detention motion, the defendant can be held for up to four days while the state prepares its motion. If the state does not file within those four days, the judge must determine conditions of release.
The uniform statewide bond schedule
Separate from detention procedures, the 2024 legislation required the Florida Supreme Court to establish a uniform bond schedule. It took effect January 1, 2024.
The schedule applies across all 20 judicial circuits. Gone are the days when bond amounts varied dramatically from county to county. Lower court judges cannot set bond below the scheduled amount—they can only increase it. A chief judge may petition the Supreme Court for a local schedule with lower amounts but must justify the departure. A chief judge may also establish a local schedule that increases bond amounts without Supreme Court approval. The law prohibits setting different amounts for cash bonds versus surety bonds.
Defendants in counties with previously lower bond schedules may face significantly higher amounts. Judges can no longer set bail amounts below the statewide floor.
The surety bond warning
One easily overlooked provision: if a defendant posts a surety bond pending a detention hearing and the court grants the state's motion, the defendant loses the bond premium.
While court must warn defendants of this consequence, it is unclear what happens if the court fails to appropriately provide this warning. Regardless, a defendant who posts a surety bond to get out, only to be ordered detained after the hearing, will not receive a refund of the premium paid to the bonding company.
This creates a difficult decision. Should a defendant who can post bond do so immediately, or wait to see how the detention hearing unfolds? There's risk either way.
These rules concentrate power in ways that endanger the presumption of innocence
We believe these changes tip the scales too far. By stripping judges of discretion, mandating detention motions, and raising bond amounts beyond the reach of many defendants, the new framework concentrates enormous power in the hands of law enforcement and prosecutors at the expense of the presumption of innocence.
The danger is not theoretical. Research confirms what defense attorneys have long observed: pretrial detention dramatically increases the likelihood that a defendant will plead guilty regardless of the strength of the case against them. The Vera Institute of Justice found that pretrial detention increases a person's likelihood of pleading guilty by 46 percent. A Harris County study found that detained defendants were 25 percent more likely than similarly situated released defendants to plead guilty, and that the data suggested roughly 17 percent of those detained would likely not have been convicted at all had they been released pretrial. The American Bar Association's Plea Bargain Task Force reached a stark conclusion: "The use of bail or pretrial detention to induce guilty pleas should be eliminated."
Florida's new rules create the opposite environment. A defendant charged with a first-degree felony now faces mandatory detention proceedings, compressed timelines, and bond amounts set by statewide schedule rather than individual circumstance. For someone who cannot post bond, the choice becomes brutal: sit in jail for weeks or months awaiting trial risking job loss, housing loss, family separation, or plead guilty to make it stop.
The overcharging risk compounds the problem. Because classification as a "dangerous crime" triggers mandatory detention proceedings, law enforcement and prosecutors now have a powerful tool to extend pretrial incarceration: charge aggressively. A questionable aggravated battery charge that might not survive a motion to dismiss nevertheless keeps the defendant locked up while the case winds through the system. The pressure to plead to any charge, on almost any terms, intensifies with every day behind bars.
The result exasperates what many observers believe is a two-tiered system of justice determined by wealth, not evidence. A defendant from a family of means charged with aggravated battery can post bond and return home the same day, free to keep working, keep paying rent, keep caring for children, and prepare a defense with their attorney. A defendant without resources, charged with the same offense on the same facts, sits in jail. The strength of the evidence against them is irrelevant. What matters is whether they can write a check.
This disparity falls hardest on those who can least afford it. Low-income defendants face an impossible calculus. Every day in jail increases the pressure to plead guilty to something, anything, just to get out. They lose jobs. They lose housing. They lose custody of children. Meanwhile, the defendant with resources fights the case from freedom, with time and stability on their side. The presumption of innocence means nothing if it applies only to those who can afford it.
None of this serves justice. It serves efficiency. It serves conviction rates. But it does not serve the constitutional principle that every person charged with a crime is innocent until proven guilty—a principle that loses meaning when the state can hold you in jail until you surrender.
What defense attorneys must do differently
Rethink first appearance strategy. First appearance is now make-or-break for many clients. If your client cannot post bond that day, they may face extended detention while awaiting the hearing and its aftermath.
Build your evidence file fast. You need community ties, employment history, and character evidence within days, not weeks. Develop systems to gather this information quickly.
Prepare detention hearing presentations. The hearing is your primary opportunity to secure release. Prepare as you would for a contested evidentiary hearing—because that's what it is.
Know the reconsideration standard. Either party can move for reconsideration at any time before trial if new information emerges that has a "material bearing" on the detention question. If circumstances change, move quickly.
Warn clients about surety bond risk. Before a client posts bond pending a detention hearing, ensure they understand the premium is not refundable if detention is ultimately ordered.
The constitutional backdrop
These changes do not eliminate constitutional protections. Florida's constitution still provides that "[u]ntil adjudged guilty, every person charged with a crime . . . shall be entitled to release on reasonable conditions"—unless charged with a capital offense or an offense punishable by life imprisonment where proof of guilt is evident or the presumption great.
Defense attorneys should continue raising constitutional challenges where these statutes or rules result in detention that cannot be squared with constitutional guarantees. The Legislature has significant power to structure pretrial procedures, but that power has limits.
Conclusion: the path forward
Florida's pretrial detention overhaul is now the law. Defense attorneys cannot change that.
Defense practitioners must recognize first appearance as the critical moment it has become and be prepared with bond arguments, community ties, and employment evidence from day one. It means building systems to gather mitigation materials in hours rather than weeks. It means preparing for detention hearings with appropriate rigor.
Defense practitioners should also raise constitutional challenges where the application of these rules produces outcomes that cannot be squared with Florida's constitutional guarantee of pretrial release on reasonable conditions. And it means making the record—documenting the cases where weak evidence and empty pockets combine to keep people locked up while they wait for their day in court.
Florida has chosen a path that prioritizes detention over release, efficiency over individualized justice, and uniformity over discretion. We believe that path is wrong. But until it changes, our job is to fight for every client caught in its grip and to make sure the courts never forget that the person sitting in that jail cell is presumed innocent.
#CriminalDefense #FloridaLaw #PretrialDetention #ConstitutionalRights #CriminalJustice
