JAMES H. THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
James H. Thomas appeals his jury conviction for burglary and grand larceny, raising issues regarding denial of a continuance, appointment of substitute counsel, and the right to proceed as co-counsel. The court affirms, finding no error in the trial court's management of these requests and no deprivation of Thomas's right to participate in his defense.
The court holds that there was no error in the denial of the continuance and substitute counsel motions, as the court granted a continuance and there was no showing that the time granted was inadequate. The court also holds that Faretta v. California does not require allowing a defendant to proceed as co-counsel, and the record shows no deprivation of Thomas's right to participate in his defense. The remaining points of appeal are without merit.
[1] A trial court does not err in denying a motion for continuance when the defendant is granted a continuance of several days and there is no showing that this time was inad…
[2] A defendant is not entitled to participate in a trial as co-counsel based on Faretta v. …
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We do not infer such a holding from a reading of the Faretta case.”
The court rejects Thomas's interpretation of Faretta as requiring hybrid representation (co-counsel participation)
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThomas was convicted by jury verdict of one count of burglary and one count of grand larceny. Thomas filed pro se motions for a continuance and for ap…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Faretta V. California Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
James H. Thomas takes this appeal from a judgment finding him guilty of one count of burglary and one count of grand larceny. The judgment was entered upon a jury verdict.1 On this appeal, Thomas urges error upon the denial of his pro se motions (1) for a continuance and (2) for appointment of substitute counsel on the ground that the court-appointed counsel was unprepared to proceed to trial. Our review of the record shows no error in these particulars. The court, in fact, granted a continuance of several days for the purpose of allowing court-appointed counsel to confer with the defendant. There was no contention or showing that this time was inadequate. Cf. Holman v. State, 347 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).
Thomas next urges that the trial court erred in denying his request to participate in the trial as co-counsel. He relies on the holding of the United States Supreme Court in Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). He draws from that case an argument that where the court is aware of a defendant’s need for an attorney, but the defendant wishes to proceed as his own attorney, he should not only be given legal counsel to advise and help him, but also should be allowed to run his own defense. We do not infer such a holding from a reading of the Faretta ease. Nevertheless, we have examined this record to determine whether there is any showing that this particular defendant was deprived of a right to participate in his defense. We find an absence of such evidence and a record of a trial judge who showed considerable patience and who attempted to give the defendant every, opportunity to participate in his defense without unduly disrupting the proceedings. Cf. Thompson v. State, 194 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); and see United States v. Bowdach, 561 F. 2d 1160 (5th Cir. 1977).
The third and fourth points presented are without merit and do not warrant further discussion. It is sufficient to say that we have examined these points and find no reversible error. Affirmed.
. In a prior appeal by this defendant, who was found guilty of burglary and grand larceny by a jury, adjudged guilty and sentenced, this court reversed the conviction upon a holding of error when the bailiff gave legal instructions to the jury. See Thomas v. State, 348 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harrell v. State, 486 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…ny right as a result of the trial court’s decision to allow Harrell to represent himself together with standby counsel. See Jones v. State, 449 So. 2d 253 (Fla.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 105 S.Ct. 269, 83 L.Ed.2d 205 (1984); see also Thomas v. State, 370 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 383 So. 2d 1203 (Fla.1980). (3) Harrell’s claim that his fifth amendment rights were violated was not properly preserved for review. See Clark v. State, 363 So. 2d 331 (Fla.1978). (4) The admission of certain “exper…
-
Thomas v. State, 383 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…l by the court of his right to participate as co-counsel. We find no error and affirm the decision of the trial court. The issue of defendant’s right to participate as co-counsel was determined by this court to be without merit in Thomas v. State, 370 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). That issue was therefore improperly raised in a subsequent motion to vacate. Epps v. State, 365 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Defendant’s allegation of ineffective assistance of the public defender is refuted by the record. D…
Authorities Cited
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975)
- United States v. Bowdach, 561 F.2d 1160 (5th Cir. 1977)
- Holman v. State, 347 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Thompson v. State, 194 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- Thomas v. State, 348 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)