E.C.H., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Waiver Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant correctly argues that the adjudication of delinquency must be reversed because the court accepted from Appellant an uncounseled plea of no contest on two felony counts and a guilty plea to violation of probation, without first advising Appellant of his right to counsel, without first inquiring of Defendant if he wished to waive counsel and determining that such waiver was freely and intelligently made, and without securing from him a written waiver of counsel as required by Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.165(a). See T.G. v. State, 741 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), rev. granted, 751 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 2000); D.L. v. State, 719 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), rev. denied, 727 So. 2d 911 (Fla.1999); J.O. v. State, 717 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).
The adjudication of delinquency and the disposition thereon and the adjudication on the probation violation are reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIFFIN, THOMPSON, JJ„ and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
M.Q. v. State, 818 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…ely imposed the commitment. There was no offer of counsel, and no basis to conclude that M.Q. made an informed waiver of his right to counsel. The state concedes that the trial court failed to follow the dictates of Rule 8.165. See E.C.H. v. State, 751 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); A.P. v. State, 730 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); D.L. v. State, 719 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). But it argues that because M.Q. failed to file a motion to withdraw his plea, this appeal is not cognizable, since such a moti…
-
B.P. v. State, 759 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…le Procedure 8.165. The State concedes that the trial court failed to follow the dictates of Rule 8.165 and that this court has held that the failure to strictly comply with the rule constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal. E.C.H. v. State, 751 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); T.G. v. State, 741 So. 2d 517, 518 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), review granted, 751 So. 2d 1254 (Fla.2000); J.O. v. State, 717 So. 2d 185, 186 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); J.R.V. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1135, 1139 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); L.D.H. v. St…
-
Dennis v. State, 769 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…his court. He seeks to raise issues which were or could have been raised in connection with his direct appeal and which therefore cannot be raised in a habeas corpus petition. See Teffeteller v. Dugger, 734 So. 2d 1009 (Fla.1999); Soirelus v. State, 751 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Further, some issues were raised in his prior four post-conviction proceedings.1 It is successive and improper to raise these issues again in a habeas corpus petition. See Johnson v. Singletary, 695 So. 2d 263 (Fla.1996). Accor…
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
- J.O. v. State, 717 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- T.G. v. State, 741 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Mangual v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 719 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)