SAMMY LEE CLARK, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dangers And Disadvantages Of Self-Representation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse defendant’s judgment of conviction and sentence because the record does not reflect a knowing and intelligent waiver of his constitutional right to assistance of counsel. We indicated in Mansfield, v. State, 430 So. 2d 586, 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) that “[i]f the defendant does not want the services of his appointed public defender, for whatever reason, the trial court must then point out the dangers and disadvantages of his conduct.” Moreover, Rule 3.111(d)(5), Fla.R.Crim.P., requires that “[i]f a waiver is accepted at any stage of the proceedings, the offer of assistance of counsel shall be renewed by the court at each subsequent stage of the proceedings at which the defendant appears without counsel.” In the case at bar, neither requirement was fulfilled. Therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence are reversed and1 the cause is remanded for new trial.
REVERSED & REMANDED.
GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., and SMITH, CHARLES E., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Antone Jones v. State, 584 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…ho must ask the questions; that is, the rule does not expressly require that it be the court that make the inquiry. But in any case, this is [*122] moot because the inquiry which the prosecutor made was insufficient under Faretta and Clark v. State, 442 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), because there was no discussion of the dangers of self-representation. This is so because she did not inquire as to his age or education as required by rule 3.111(d), and because there was no discussion of appellant’s knowledge…
-
Burns v. State, 573 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…of the benefits associated with the right to counsel he was relinquishing or the dangers of self representation. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); Johnston v. State, 497 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1986); Clark v. State, 442 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.111(d). The factor that standby [*1048] counsel may be available does not modify the extent of necessary inquiry. We find no error in the denial of appellant’s motion to suppress or in the eviden-tiary issues…
-
Sparaga v. State, 111 So. 3d 260 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…ga to proceed without counsel. In Keene v. State, 420 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), this court reversed and remanded for a new trial where the defendant never requested to act as his own counsel, but was forced to do so.4 See also Clark v. State, 442 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (reversing and remanding for new trial where record did not reflect knowing and intelligent waiver of constitutional right to assistance of counsel). In Mansfield v. State, 430 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), the Fourth District…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mansfield v. State, 430 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)