STERLING A. CLOWERS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 Clowers appealed a trial court's denial of his public records request for the State Attorney's prosecutorial files, arguing he should receive free copies based on his indigent status. The appellate court affirmed, holding that while certain state attorney files are public records, indigent defendants must pay the statutory or actual cost of copying those records when preparing postconviction motions, distinguishing between free copies available for plenary appeals and paid copies for postconviction relief.
An indigent defendant must pay the prescribed statutory fee or actual cost of duplication for copies of public records from the State Attorney's files when preparing a postconviction motion. While indigent prisoners may obtain free copies for a plenary appeal, no such provision exists for obtaining free copies after conviction and sentencing become final.
[1] A defendant is entitled to copies of the State Attorney's prosecutorial files once a conviction and sentence become final.
[2] Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes requires payment for copies of public records, absent specific legislative provision for free access.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“There is no doubt that certain portions of the state attorney's investigation files are public records under chapter 119 once a defendant's conviction and sentence become final.”
Establishes that State Attorney files are public records after conviction and sentencing, but does not resolve the cost issue.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSterling Clowers, an indigent defendant who had been convicted and sentenced, filed a public records request pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 119.…
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 Public Records Request cases and more on FLexlaw
LAGOA, Judge.
Defendant Sterling A. Clowers appeals the trial court’s order denying his public records request.1 For the following reasons, we affirm.
Defendant filed, pursuant to Section 119.01, Florida Statutes (2006), a motion for production of the State Attorney’s prosecutorial files in order to prepare a motion for postconviction relief. In the motion, Defendant alleged that because he was previously declared indigent, and continued to “assert his indigent status” the trial court should grant his motion and issue an order allowing Defendant to receive the files “without cost.” The trial court denied the motion as legally insufficient on its face. This appeal ensued.
The State concedes that the Defendant is entitled to copies of its files. See Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1, 2 (Fla. 1994) (“There is no doubt that certain portions of the state attorney’s investigation files are public records under chapter 119 once a defendant’s conviction and sentence become final.”). The State argues, however, that a defendant must pay the State for such copies for use in preparation of a postconviction motion.2 Id. at 2-3. We agree. Indeed, while an indigent prisoner may obtain free copies for a plenary appeal, there is no such provision to obtain them afterward. See Ridge v. Adams, 643 So. 2d 116, 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). Sections 119.07(l)(a) and (4), Florida Statutes (2006), require the custodian of public records to furnish copies upon payment prescribed either by statute or the actual cost of duplication. Moreover, as the Florida Supreme Court has stated, “[t]here is no provision in Chapter 119 for providing copies of the public records free of charge to indigent persons.” Roesch, 633 So. 2d at 2. Because “[i]t is the legislature which has seen fit to designaté portions of the State Attorney’s files as public records.... it is up to the legislature if it wishes to make special provisions for indigent inmates to have free access to those records.” Id. at 3.
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order denying Defendant’s public records request.
. We review a nial court’s denial of a public records request for abuse of discretion. See Glock v. Moore, 776 So. 2d 243, 254 (Fla. 2001).
. The State advised the Defendant that the 'charge for copying was .15 cents per page. The > Defendant was further advised that a representative could be sent to review the requested files.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Osorio v. State, 34 So. 3d 98 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…s. See Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1, 2 (Fla.1993) (“There is no doubt that certain portion of the state attorney’s investigation file are public records under chapter 119 once a defendant’s conviction and sentence become final.”); Clowers v. State, 960 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (confirming that a defendant who was preparing a motion for post conviction relief was entitled to copies of the state attorney’s prose-cutorial files pursuant to section 119.01 of the Florida Statutes); Woodfaulk v. State, 935 So…
-
Antwaun Durell Simmons v. State, 40 So. 3d 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…he trial court entered an order denying this relief. As to the transcripts, [*875] the trial court correctly stated that the defendant is not entitled to transcripts at the State’s expense. Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1993); Clowers v. State, 960 So. 2d 840, 841 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). Attached to the defendant’s petition was a memorandum from the court clerk stating that there is no written plea agreement in the court file in this case. For the judgment and sentence the defendant would need to pay the cop…
-
Elvin Guzman v. State, 16 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Clowers v. State, 960 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).…
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
- Glock v. Moore, 776 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 2001)
- Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993)
- Warren v. Warren, 643 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)