JAMES TERRY, 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 trial court erred by denying defense counsel’s motion to withdraw based upon a conflict of interest.
Defense counsel moved to withdraw, stating an irreconcilable conflict due to representing the mother of a victim in a separate case against the appell…
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 Legal Representation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse Appellant’s conviction for battery on a law enforcement officer. The trial court erred by denying defense counsel’s motion to withdraw based upon a conflict of interest.
Once a public defender moves to withdraw under section 27.53(3), Florida Statutes, from the representation of a client based on a conflict arising from adverse or hostile interests between two clients, the trial court must grant separate representation. See Guzman v. State, 644 So. 2d 996, 999 (Fla.1994). A trial court is not permitted to re-weigh the facts consid ered by the public defender in determining that a conflict exists. See id.
Here, counsel categorically stated in his motion to withdraw that he had an irreconcilable conflict due to his representation of the mother of a victim in a separate case against Appellant. We recognize that in light of counsel’s certification of conflict, the trial court had no discretion to deny the motion. See, e.g., Leslie v. State, 720 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Reardon v. State, 715 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Cankur v. State, 706 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Moreover, we do not find that Appellant waived the conflict of interest issue.
All other issues raised are moot. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
STONE, C.J., WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Guzman v. State, 644 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 1994)
- Reardon v. State, 715 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Leslie v. State, 720 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Guven Cankur v. State, 706 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)