HASAN JONES, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Williams v. State, 578 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
  …ring, we find no error in sentencing appellant where appellant was “present” by video means, since he specifically agreed in writing to the procedure and thus waived any right to be “personally” present in open court. We distinguish Jacobs v. State, 567 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), because in that case it does not appear that there was any written agreement to the video sentencing. In the instant case the appellant was present by video; saw, heard and was able to speak to the judge; and was able to speak p…
• Schiffer v. State, 617 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
  …ndant had signed a written no contest plea specifically agreeing to a video sentencing and, because the defendant was afforded an opportunity to speak privately with his attorney during the proceeding. We distinguished Williams-from Jacobs v. State, 567 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), a case where we found reversible error in a video sentencing procedure, by pointing out that the defendant in Jacobs did not sign a waiver agreement nor did the Jacobs defendant have private access to confer with his counsel. T…
• Seymour v. State, 582 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
  …al importance that a defendant have the opportunity to engage in personal and private conference with his counsel to resolve the numerous problems and misunderstandings that can develop during the course of pre-trial proceedings. In Jacobs v. State, 567 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) we concluded that it was error to use a similar procedure at sentencing. We noted that rules 3.130 and 3.160, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, permit communication by way of audiovisual equipment only at first appearances and…