DONALD MORRIS, 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.
Affirmed sexual predator designation where trial court offered counsel at the predator hearing and defendant rejected it, satisfying Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(5) without requiring full Faretta colloquy.
A trial court satisfies the requirement to renew the offer of counsel at a sexual predator hearing by simply offering assistance of counsel, even if it does not conduct a full Faretta waiver colloquy.
[1] Renewal of counsel offer at sexual predator hearing under Fla. …
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMorris was convicted of sexual battery on a child and indecent assault, and the state moved to have him declared a sexual predator. At the predator he…
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 Indecent Assault cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, Judge.
After appellant was convicted of sexual battery on a child and indecent assault, he was declared a sexual predator pursuant to section 775.21, Florida Statutes (1993). In his prior appeal from his conviction, he argued that the trial court erroneously allowed him to represent himself without a knowing and intelligent waiver under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). We affirmed, finding that there was a proper waiver. Morris v. State, 667 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
At the hearing on the state’s motion to have appellant declared a sexual predator, the court informed appellant of his right to counsel which appellant rejected. The court did not go through the Faretta requirements at that hearing. Appellant argues that the court should have gone through all of the waiver requirements at the hearing; however, he has not cited any authority to support his argument. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.111(d)(5) provides that once a defendant has waived the right to counsel “the offer of assistance of counsel shall be renewed by the court at each subsequent stage of the proceedings at which the defendant appears without counsel.” The court did offer counsel at the hearing, and we therefore affirm.
GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. City OF Pompano Beach, 829 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…ying the class is subject to review under an abuse of discretion standard. Execu-Tech Bus. Sys. v. Appleton Papers, Inc., 743 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Renaissance Cruises, Inc. v. Glassman, 738 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Jenne v. Solomos, 707 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); and Cordell v. World Ins. Co., 418 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), rev. denied, 429 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1983). Absent an abuse of that discretion, the trial court’s order must be affirmed. The Florida Department of Agriculture raise…
-
Execu-Tech Bus. Sys., Inc. v. Appleton Papers Inc., 743 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…re dismissed. The order denying class certification is affirmed. AFFIRMED. STEVENSON, GROSS, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur. . The standard of review of orders on class certification is abuse of discretion. Jenne v. Solomos, 707 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). . This is called an "indirect purchaser lawsuit,” because the Florida consumers proposed as class plaintiffs did not purchase the fax paper directly from the defendant manufacturers, but rather through middlemen and retailers.…
-
Hutson v. Rexall Sundown, Inc., 837 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…New Jersey) of all of those persons who purchased Rexall Sundown’s [*1092] Calcium 900 and Calcium 1200 within the six years prior to December 3, 1998. See Renaissance Cruises, Inc. v. Glassman, 738 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Jenne v. Solomos, 707 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). The elements of a class action claim or defense are set forth in rule 1.220 Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Under rule 1.220(a), a party must establish that: “the members of the class are so numerous that separate joinder of…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975)
- Morris v. State, 667 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)