COREY BENNETT, 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.
The Florida First District Court of Appeal granted the Public Defender for the Second Judicial Circuit's motion to withdraw as appellate counsel from this case and 22 others due to severe understaffing and caseload overload. The court acknowledged that while this remedy improperly shifts financial responsibility to counties rather than the state, the persistent inadequate funding left no alternative.
The court granted the Public Defender's motion to withdraw from the 23 cases, acknowledging the inadequate funding necessitated this remedy despite its undesirable consequences of shifting financial responsibility to counties.
[1] A public defender's office may be permitted to withdraw as counsel when underfunding leads to an inability to manage caseloads and prevent backlogs, potentially infringin…
[2] When granting a motion for a public defender to withdraw due to underfunding, a court may relinquish jurisdiction to the circuit court for the appointment of a special pu…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“During the months of April through July, 1992, inclusive, the Public Defender's staff has filed 208 initial briefs in direct criminal appeals in this court. During that same period, however, the office has been designated to handle 280 appeals.”
Establishes the factual basis for the finding that the workload exceeded the office's capacity, justifying the withdrawal request.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Public Defender for the Second Judicial Circuit sought to withdraw from 23 appellate cases due to insufficient staff to timely brief assigned case…
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 Motion To Withdraw As Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
ORDER ON COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW
PER CURIAM.
Nancy Daniels, Public Defender for the Second Judicial Circuit, moves to withdraw as appellate counsel from this case and 22 other cases. For the reasons that follow, we grant the motion.
The Public Defender moves to withdraw on grounds that she does not have sufficient staff to timely brief the appellate cases that have been assigned to her. This problem is an ongoing one, and as recently as March of this year she was permitted to withdraw as appellate counsel in 128 cases. Woods v. State, 595 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Immediately following that relief, however, movant shows that the backlog of cases occurred again. The backlog was attributable to the same cause, assignment of more cases to the Public Defender than the current staff can reasonably brief. During the months of April through July, 1992, inclusive, the Public Defender’s staff has filed 208 initial briefs in direct criminal appeals in this court. During that same period, however, the office has been designated to handle 280 appeals. We accordingly find that the request to withdraw from 23 cases is justified.
As we stated in Woods, we acknowledge that the remedy asked for by the Public Defender and hereby granted by the court is not a palatable one, as it results in the financial responsibility for these appeals falling on the counties, rather than the State of Florida where it properly belongs. In light of the continued inadequate funding of Ms. Daniels’ office, however, we find we have no choice but to grant relief.
We grant the motion of the Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, to withdraw as appellate counsel in this cause and relinquish jurisdiction to the circuit court for 30 days for appointment of a special public defender. We temporarily appoint the Public Defender for the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit to represent appellant in that forum during that time. Temporary counsel shall ensure the matter is timely brought before the trial court and the clerk of the circuit court shall bring this order to the attention of the Chief Judge of the Circuit. The circuit court clerk is also directed to provide this court, the Public Defender for the Second Circuit, and the appellant, at his last known address, with copies of the order of appointment of a special public defender. In the event such an appointment is not timely made, temporary counsel shall file a written report within 45 days of this date explaining the lack of an appointment.
Time for service of the initial brief is extended to 30 days from date of the order appointing the special public defender. Similar relief will be granted in the remaining 22 cases by unpublished orders.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
JOANOS, C.J., and SMITH and WEBSTER, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
KEY v. State, 638 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…e the supreme court. The supreme court denied rehearing in the case on September 16,1992. On September 22, 1992, this court issued its opinion on remand from the supreme court, stating only, “[W]e affirm the trial court on all issues.” Key v. State, 605 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (Key III). Key moved for rehearing of our decision, and the mandate was issued on November 12,1992, after denial of the motion for rehearing. The effective date of our Key III decision was September 22, 1992, the date appearing o…
-
Denmark v. State, 616 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…hether the appellants are being afforded their constitutionally guaranteed right to effective assistance of counsel on appeal. We have granted similar relief to the Public Defender in similar circumstances in the past, see, e.g., Bennett v. State, 605 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Woods v. State, 595 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), and cases cited therein. There is no apparent reason to deny relief at this time and the motion to withdraw as counsel for appellant in this cause is granted. Jurisdiction is r…
Authorities Cited
- Woods v. State, 595 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)