WALTER EUGENE CAIN, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
When an attorney and client disagree on trial strategy, the client has the ultimate decision-making authority.
During jury selection, defense counsel and the defendant disagreed on the final juror selection. The trial court allowed the defendant to make the fin…
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 Right To Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
[*876] HARRIS, Judge.
Walter Cain appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine. He contends that the trial court denied him his right to counsel.1 We affirm.
This case illustrates an interesting dilemma that sometimes confronts trial judges. After an unusual and lengthy jury selection process during which defense counsel continually asked for Cain’s input, Cain and his attorney could not agree on the final selection of jurors. Finally the court intervened:
[I]t would appear to the court that you’ve given your client your best judgment, your best advise [sic]. And I believe the client does have the final word in these matters.
[A]fter a lawyer has given his client his best advise [sic], the client will have to make the final decision.
Well, I’d ask not — ask you not to contend with him any further. Let him make the decision. And we’ll accept his decision.
Cain chose his jury and was convicted. On appeal, Cain relies on certain cases that hold that one cannot be represented by counsel and also represent himself. Dickey v. McNeal, 445 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Sheppard v. State, 391 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Smith v. State, 444 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
But this is not a case of who is representing Cain — clearly the lawyer is — but who gets to make the final decision when the lawyer and the client disagree on how to conduct the trial.
The lawyer’s function is to present alternative courses of action, not make decisions in contravention to his client’s wishes. Milligan v. State, 177 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1965). In cases where the attorney and the defendant disagree as to trial strategy, the defendant must make the ultimate decision. Blanco v. State, 452 So. 2d 520 (Fla.1984).
Finding no error, we AFFIRM.
DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur. . We find Cain’s other issue on appeal to be without merit.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Puglisi v. State, 112 So. 3d 1196 (Fla. 2013)…eeks review of the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Puglisi v. State, 56 So. 3d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), on the ground that it expressly and directly conflicts with a decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Cain v. State, 565 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), on a question, of law. The Fourth District subsequently certified conflict with the Fifth District’s decision in Cain. See Puglisi, 56 So. 3d at 794. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), (4), Fla. Const. The question be…1 / 2
-
Puglisi v. State, 56 So. 3d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…, but we grant his motion for certification of conflict. To the extent our slip opinion, Puglisi v. State, No. 4D08-3056, 2010 WL 5173843 (Fla. 4th DCA Dec.22, 2010), conflicts with the opinion of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Cain v. State, 565 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), we certify conflict to the Supreme Court of Florida. WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.1 . Judge Farmer could not participate in the rehearing due to his retirement; the chief judge approved the issuance of this opinion with t…
Authorities Cited
- Blanco v. State, 452 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1984)
- State v. Thompson, 444 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Milligan v. State, 177 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- Verdell Hill, Jr. v. State, 391 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Winford Dickey v. Honorable Raymond T. McNEAL, 445 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)