M.E.F., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constitutional Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges his convictions for burglary and obstructing police officers. We find merit in the appellant’s argument that his constitutional rights were violated when the trial court adjudicated the appellant guilty without first permitting defense counsel to present a closing argument.
In a bench trial or a jury trial, it is an absolute violation of the Sixth Amendment for the court to deny the defendant the right to make closing argument. Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853, 95 S.Ct. 2550, 45 L.Ed.2d 593 (1975). It is true that when defense counsel complained, the trial court said that a closing argument could be presented in writing. In our opinion, this did not cure the error nor did defense counsel’s possible acquiescence in that procedure constitute a waiver of the violation of the appellant’s constitutional right.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new adjudicatory hearing before a different trial judge.
Reversed and remanded.
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and DANAHY and LEHAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.M.S. v. State, 921 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…jury trials. Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853, 857-58, 95 S.Ct. 2550, 45 L.Ed.2d 593 (1975). Permitting a closing argument to be made in writing does not cure the trial court’s error in denying the right to make a closing argument. M.E.F. v. State, 595 So. 2d 86, 87 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). See also S.G. v. State, 678 So. 2d 495, 495 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (reversing adjudications after trial court refused to permit closing argument in delinquency proceeding); T.W. v. State, 677 So. 2d 111, 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…
-
McD. v. State, 607 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. The appellant correctly contends that her constitutional rights were violated when the trial judge adjudicated the appellant guilty without first permitting her defense counsel to present a closing argument. M.E.F. v. State, 595 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA1992). In this case, not only did the trial judge not permit closing argument, he [*514] terminated the trial during the course of the state’s cross examination of the appellant, a clear violation of the appellant’s trial rights guarante…
-
D.B. v. State, 979 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…uvenile defendants were denied the right to present a closing argument. See J.M.S. v. State, 921 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); T.W. v. State, 677 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); T. McD. v. State, 607 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); M.E.F. v. State, 595 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); E.C. v. State, 588 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); E.V.R. v. State, 342 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Invariably, those courts remanded for new adjudicatory hearings. D.B. maintains that the above-captioned authorities illus [*112…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853 (U.S. 1975)