JOSEPH GARRON, PETITIONER,
v.
EDWARD H. BERGSTROM, JR., ETC., RESPONDENT
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.
An indigent defendant charged with first-degree murder sought mandamus relief to compel appointment of a psychiatric expert after his original court-appointed expert died. The Florida Supreme Court granted relief, holding that under Rule 3.216(a), a trial court has no discretion to deny appointment of an expert when counsel has reason to believe the defendant may be incompetent or insane.
The trial court has no discretion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.216(a) to deny appointment of an expert to assist in preparing a defendant's defense when counsel has reason to believe the defendant may be incompetent to stand trial or may have been insane at the time of the offense, even if the defendant previously received such services from a different expert.
[1] An indigent defendant is entitled to the appointment of one expert to assist in the preparation of their defense when counsel has reason to believe the client may be inco…
[2] A trial court has no discretion to deny the appointment of an expert to assist in the defense of an indigent defendant under Rule 3.216(a) when the statutory conditions a…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“when counsel for an indigent defendant has "reason to believe" that his client "may be incompetent to stand trial or that he may have been insane at the time of the offense," the defendant is entitled to have the court appoint one expert to assist in the preparation of his defense.”
Establishes the mandatory nature of expert appointment under Rule 3.216(a) and the applicable legal standard
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner was charged with two counts of first-degree murder and declared indigent. A psychiatric expert was initially appointed. Petitioner then fil…
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 Mandamus Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
This cause is before us on a petition for writ of mandamus. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(8), Fla. Const. Petitioner was charged with two counts of first-degree murder. He was adjudicated indigent and a public defender was appointed to represent him. The trial court, in response to petitioner’s motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.216(a), appointed a psychiatric expert to aid in the preparation of his defense.
The petitioner subsequently filed a motion for a court determination of competency to stand trial, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.210, and a notice of intention to rely upon insanity as a defense. The trial court appointed two mental health professionals to examine petitioner for the court. Upon receiving their reports, the court found that petitioner was incompetent to stand trial and committed him to a treatment facility.
Subsequently, after re-evaluation, the court found that petitioner was competent to stand trial. Defense counsel then moved for the appointment of an expert to assist in the preparation of petitioner’s defense because the previously appointed expert had died in the interim. The trial court denied this motion, concluding that petitioner had already received the services of a court-appointed expert and was not entitled to the appointment of another expert.
Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus requiring the respondent to appoint an expert to assist in the preparation of his defense. We grant the relief sought. In our recent decision in State v. Hamilton, 448 So. 2d 1007 (Fla.1984), we held that when counsel for an indigent defendant has “reason to believe” that his client “may be incompetent to stand trial or that he may have been insane at the time of the offense,” the defendant is entitled to have the court appoint one expert to assist in the preparation of his defense.
Id. at 1008. We determined in Hamilton that rule 3.216(a) gives the trial court no discretion in acting to appoint an expert to assist in the preparation of a defense. The fact that the petitioner in the instant case had an appointed expert who later died does not control.
Accordingly, respondent is hereby directed to appoint a psychiatric expert to assist petitioner. We withhold the formal issuance of the writ of mandamus, however, because we believe the respondent will comply with our directions in this opinion.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, ALDERMAN, McDonald, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hall v. Honorable L. Page Haddock, 573 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…10 and 3.216 were not discussed in Hamilton, we do not share the respondents’ view that the facts of this case should cause us to reach a different result. We are also persuaded of the correctness of our result by the holding in Garron v. Bergstrom, 453 So. 2d 405 (Fla.1984). There, the defendant was appointed an expert to assist him and he was found incompetent to stand trial. When he was subsequently found competent he renewed his request because his previously-appointed defense expert had died in the inter…
-
Tingle v. State, 503 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…le 3.210, motions filed pursuant to rule 3.216 are not addressed to the trial court’s discretion, and an expert must be appointed to assist in the preparation of a defendant’s case. State v. Hamilton, 448 So. 2d 1007 (Fla.1984), Garron v. Bergstrom, 453 So. 2d 405 (Fla.1984). That rule provides: (a) When in any criminal case counsel for a defendant adjudged to be indigent [*1306] or partially indigent, whether public defender or court appointed, shall have reason to believe that the defendant may be incompet…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Hamilton, 448 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 1984)