DANIEL ANTHONY KELLOND
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2020-03-26
No. 19-1288
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2020)

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.

Synopsis

The appellate court reversed a battery conviction because the trial court failed to hold a competency hearing after receiving conflicting expert reports. The court remanded the case for a retroactive competency determination.


Holding

Yes, the trial court committed fundamental error by failing to make an independent competency finding once a reason for a competency hearing surfaced. This failure constitutes a due process violation.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court's failure to hold a competency hearing and render a competency determination after receiving evidence suggesting the defendant may be incompetent to stand t…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Key Quotes

“Because an independent competency finding is a due-process right that cannot be waived once a reason for a competency hearing has surfaced, the trial court fundamentally err[s] in failing to make such a finding.”

Establishes the legal principle that a competency finding is a due process right that the court must address.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

During pretrial proceedings, the trial court ordered a competency hearing for Daniel Kellond due to conflicting expert reports. However, the record di…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Osterhaus

RAY, C.J.

Daniel Kellond appeals his judgment and sentence for battery by a detainee upon another detainee. Kellond contends that the trial court committed fundamental error by failing to hold a competency hearing and render a competency determination after the court had reasonable grounds to believe he was incompetent to proceed. Accepting the State’s concession of error, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. During pretrial proceedings below, the court directed counsel to schedule a competency hearing after the court received conflicting expert reports about Kellond’s competency to stand trial. Yet nothing in the record shows that a competency hearing took place or that the court ruled on Kellond’s competency.

“Because an independent competency finding is a due-process right that cannot be waived once a reason for a competency hearing has surfaced, the trial court fundamentally err[s] in failing to make such a finding.” Zern v. State, 191 So. 3d 962, 965 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016); see also Blaxton v. State, 188 So. 3d 48, 48–49 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (reversing for further proceedings where the record did not reflect that “the requirements of judicial review and adjudication of competency were met below”). We thus reverse and remand for a retroactive determination of competency, if possible. Zern, 191 So. 3d at 965. If the court finds that Kellond was competent at the time of trial, it must enter a nunc pro tunc order memorializing that finding with no change in the judgment or sentence. Id. If a retroactive determination is not possible, or if the court finds that Kellond was incompetent, Kellond will be entitled to a new trial if and when competent to proceed. Id. REVERSED and REMANDED. LEWIS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur. _____________________________


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw