RONALD COTTON, 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.
Defendant's absence from a calendar call and continuance hearing did not violate his right to be present at essential stages because these were not pretrial conferences requiring his presence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3), and any error would be harmless.
A defendant's absence from a calendar call and a hearing on a continuance motion does not violate his right to be present at essential stages because these are not pretrial conferences requiring his presence under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.180(a)(3).
[1] A calendar call and a hearing on a continuance motion are not pretrial conferences requiring the defendant's presence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3)…
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 intelligenceAppellant was convicted of second degree murder. Four days before trial, his defense counsel orally moved to continue the trial because he had not bee…
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 Pretrial Conference cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of second degree murdei». He argues that his right to be present at all essential stages of his proceedings was violated because he was not present at a calendar call when his counsel advised the court that he was not ready for trial because he had not been able to depose the medical examiner. Four days prior to the trial date, defense counsel orally moved for a continuance because he still had been unable to depose the medical examiner. The court denied the motion, but provided that defense counsel would have the opportunity to depose the medical examiner before that witness testified. The defendant argues that his absence at that hearing was also error. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3) provides that the defendant shall be present “at any pretrial conference, unless waived by the defendant in writing.” Although pretrial conference is not defined in our criminal rules, Rule 3.220(p) provides:
(p) Pretrial Conference.
(1) The trial court may hold 1 or more pretrial conferences, with trial counsel present, to consider such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial. The defendant shall be present unless the defendant waives this in writing.
We do not agree with the defendant that the calendar call or the later hearing at which his counsel requested a continuance were-pretrial conferences as contemplated by Rule 3.180(a)(3). Even if they were, appellant’s absence would be harmless, because he could not have assisted in any way. Coney v. State, 653 So. 2d 1009, 1013 (Fla.1995). We therefore affirm.
GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur,-