JAMES THOMAS A/K/A JESSIE SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1992-02-19
No. 91-1149
JOANOS, C.J., and MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
593 So. 2d 617 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1992)

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

James Thomas appealed his first-degree murder conviction and sentence, but faced delays in his appellate briefing when the Public Defender's office requested multiple extensions of time due to case backlog. The appellate court granted the final extension while warning the Public Defender's office to reduce delays and case backlogs going forward.


Holding

The court granted the additional extension until February 28, 1992, allowing the Public Defender to remain as appellate counsel. However, the court warned that the Public Defender's office must take remedial measures to reduce case backlog and resulting delays in briefing.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate court may grant an extension of time for filing a brief upon a showing that the defendant will be better served by the current counsel and that steps are bei…

[2] Appellate courts are aware of and can address excessive delays in briefing caused by the backlog of public defender offices.

Previewing 2 of 4 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

“It is true, as the Public Defender argues, that this particular defendant will be better served if no change in appellate counsel is made at this point in time.”

Court's rationale for granting extension while recognizing continuity of counsel serves the defendant's interests

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

James Thomas was convicted of first degree murder. A notice of appeal was filed in April 1991, and a fourteen-volume record on appeal was filed in Aug…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

James Thomas appeals his conviction and sentence for first degree murder. The notice of appeal was filed in April, 1991, and a fourteen volume record on appeal was filed in August. The Public Defender for the Second Judicial Circuit was then designated as appellate counsel and obtained four extensions of 30 days each on the initial brief. When counsel moved for a fifth extension of time, we directed her to either file the brief within ten days or show cause why the Public Defender should not be removed as counsel for appellant. Assistant Public Defender Stover responded, stating that because of the complexity of this case and her current backlog, she would be unable to complete the brief within ten days. She further suggested, however, that even though substantial delays would be encountered if she remains as appellate counsel, ultimately the brief would be filed sooner under that scenario than if she is required to withdraw from representing Mr. Thomas and a special public defender appointed. See Skitka v. State, 579 So. 2d 102 (Fla.1991); In re Order on Prosecution of Criminal Appeals by the Tenth Judicial Circuit Public Defender, 561 So. 2d 1130 (Fla.1990); Young v. State, 580 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Day v. State, 570 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Terry v. State, 547 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Grube v. State, 529 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).

We ordered counsel to appear before the court and having now considered the pleadings and argument of counsel, we discharge our order to show cause and grant the extension of time. It is true, as the Public Defender argues, that this particular defendant will be better served if no change in appellate counsel is made at this point in time. We are nevertheless aware that the extensions for serving initial briefs sought by many of the appellate assistant public defenders in the Second Circuit are excessive and well beyond the time frames contemplated in In re Order on Prosecution of Criminal Appeals. The Public Defender must, either by moving to withdraw and/or by taking remedial measures in the administration of her office, promptly reduce the case backlog and the resulting delays in briefing. Public Defender Daniels represented to the court at oral argument that a motion to withdraw from a number of cases would be forthcoming and, without prejudging the merits of that motion, we are willing to grant another extension in this case upon the assurance that steps are being taken to reduce backlog and delay. Accordingly, we grant an additional extension of time until February 28, 1992, and order that the Public Defender serve an initial brief on behalf of Mr. Thomas on or before that date.

JOANOS, C.J., and MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw