EUGENE JONES, 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.
Eugene Jones appealed a trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw a guilty plea, arguing the court erred by failing to appoint conflict-free counsel to represent him at the hearing as he requested. The appellate court held that once a defendant and counsel take adversarial positions at a motion-to-withdraw-plea hearing, the defendant is constitutionally entitled to conflict-free counsel, and the trial court's failure to appoint such counsel constitutes reversible error that cannot be harmless.
A defendant facing incarceration has a constitutional right to conflict-free counsel at a critical stage of proceedings, including at a hearing on a motion to withdraw a plea once it becomes clear the defendant and counsel have taken adversarial positions. The trial court's failure to appoint conflict-free counsel cannot be treated as harmless error, even if the motion might have been facially insufficient to require a hearing.
[1] A hearing on a motion to withdraw a plea is a critical stage in criminal proceedings where a defendant is entitled to conflict-free counsel.
[2] When a defendant and counsel take adversarial positions regarding a motion to withdraw a plea, the trial court must appoint conflict-free counsel to advise the defendant.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“[A] criminal defendant facing incarceration has a right to counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings against him.”
Establishes the foundational constitutional right to counsel at critical stages, including motion-to-withdraw-plea hearings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones filed a motion to withdraw his plea, alleging he was 'misled' and did not 'understand the consequences' of the plea. At the hearing, his counsel…
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 Conflict-Free Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
BROWNING, J.
Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion to withdraw plea, arguing the trial court erred by failing to appoint conflict-free counsel to represent him during the hearing on his motion, as Appellant requested. The State argues Appellant’s motion was facially insufficient to require a hearing; thus, the trial court could have summarily denied the motion. However, the State concedes that if Appellant was entitled to a hearing, appointment of conflict-free counsel was required. We reverse.
Appellant filed a motion to withdraw plea alleging he was “misled.” His counsel of record filed a notice of hearing and order to transport, listing herself as Appellant’s attorney. At the hearing, when asked for clarification regarding the basis for his motion, Appellant stated he did not “understand the consequences” of his plea. The court then asked Appellant’s counsel of record whether she wanted to inquire. Counsel replied she could not be Appellant’s counsel of record for the motion to withdraw plea, because she would be a witness during the hearing. Subsequently, the State called Appellant’s counsel of record as a witness. Appellant was unrepresented during the hearing.
“[A] criminal defendant facing incarceration has a right to counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings against him.” Padgett v. State, 748 So. 2d 70, 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (citations omitted). “Trial, sentencing and direct appeal are all critical stages at which a defendant is entitled to counsel.” Id. (citations omitted).
At a hearing on a motion to withdraw plea, once it becomes clear a defendant and his counsel have “taken adversarial positions concerning what actually happened while counsel was advising his client concerning the plea,” the defendant is entitled to conflict-free counsel. Id. at 73; Rodgers v. State, 765 So. 2d 195, 196 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (indicating reversal required where trial court failed to appoint conflict-free counsel at hearing on motion to withdraw plea, because hearing was critical stage in criminal proceedings); Lewis v. State, 812 So. 2d 597, 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (indicating defendant entitled to appointment of conflict-free counsel to assist in pursuing motion to withdraw plea); Wofford v. State, 819 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (same).
Here, it was clear at the onset of the hearing that counsel and Appellant were in adversarial positions, because counsel informed the court she would be a witness. The State’s argument that Appellant’s motion was insufficient on its face, and could have been summarily denied, appears to be an argument that the trial court’s error in not appointing counsel at the hearing was harmless, because the trial court could have denied the motion without a hearing. This argument is without merit. This court has held “assistance of counsel is among those ‘constitutional rights so basic to a fair trial that their infraction can never be treated as harmless error.’ ” Lee v. State, 690 So. 2d 664, 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (finding defendant entitled to conflict-free counsel), quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 23 & n. 8, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967).
Appellant was entitled to representation by conflict-free counsel. The order denying Appellant’s motion to withdraw plea is REVERSED, and the case REMANDED for appointment of conflict-free counsel and reconsideration of Appellant’s motion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BARFIELD and KAHN, JJ. concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garcia v. State, 846 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ia and his counsel had adversarial positions concerning what actually happened while counsel was advising Garcia concerning the plea, Garcia was entitled to conflict-free counsel. See Gunn v. State, 841 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Jones v. State, 827 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Padgett v. State, 743 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). The denial of the constitutional right to assistance of counsel can never be treated as harmless error. Jones, 827 So. 2d at 1087. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a ne…
-
Smith v. State, 845 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…nflict-free counsel. It is well established that a criminal defendant facing incarceration has the right to counsel at each critical stage of the proceedings. See Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1, 90 S.Ct. 1999, 26 L.Ed.2d 387 (1970); Jones v. State, 827 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Padgett v. State, 743 So. 2d 70, 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Once a conflict of interest arises between the defendant and his counsel, the preferred course to follow is for the “trial court to appoint or allow the defendant to retai…1 / 2
-
Carmona v. State, 873 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…se, the court noted the conflict was “patent.” However, it did not limit this holding to “patent” conflict cases. The Smith court cited to two other DCA cases as authority for its holding that do not mention “patent” or “latent.” In Jones v. State, 827 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), the first case relied on by Smith, the defendant claimed he was misled when entering into his plea agreement and that he did not understand the consequences of his plea. His attorney who had been representing him refused to repr…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1967)
- Wofford v. State, 819 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Williamson v. Williamson, 690 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Fletcher Rodgers v. State, 765 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Thedrice Lewis v. State, 812 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)