TRAVIS ROUSE, 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.
Travis Rouse appealed his grand theft auto conviction, arguing the trial court erred by failing to appoint conflict-free counsel when he moved to withdraw his guilty plea and instead summarily denying the motion. The appellate court agreed and reversed, holding that when a patent conflict of interest arises between counsel and client in a plea withdrawal proceeding, the court must appoint conflict-free counsel.
Yes. When a patent conflict of interest arises between counsel and client in a motion to withdraw plea proceeding, the court has a duty to appoint conflict-free counsel and cannot summarily deny the motion without allowing the defendant an opportunity to present evidence and argument with the assistance of independent counsel.
[1] A trial court must appoint conflict-free counsel when a patent conflict of interest arises between a defendant and counsel in a motion to withdraw a plea proceeding.
[2] A trial court errs by summarily denying a motion to withdraw a plea without appointing conflict-free counsel when the defendant alleges ineffective assistance of counsel…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“When a patent conflict of interest arises between counsel and client in a motion to withdraw proceeding, the court has a duty to offer the client conflict-free counsel.”
States the legal standard that the trial court violated by failing to appoint conflict-free counsel
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRouse pleaded guilty in an open plea to grand theft of an automobile. Prior to sentencing, his appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw the plea, …
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 Right To Conflict-Free Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
LAWSON, J.
Travis Rouse appeals from his conviction and sentence on the charge of grand theft of an automobile. He argues that the trial court erred by failing to appoint conflict-free counsel in connection with his motion to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing and, instead, summarily denying the motion. We agree, and reverse.
Rouse pled guilty in an open plea to the court to the single charge of grand theft auto alleged in the information. Prior to sentencing, Rouse’s appointed lawyer filed a motion to withdraw the plea on Rouse’s behalf. The motion alleges that the lawyer failed to fully inform Rouse on the law applicable to his ease prior to entry of the plea. When the matter was brought to the court’s attention, the attorney stated that he filed the motion at Rouse’s direction, but would not comment further on Rouse’s alleged basis for withdrawing the plea. Rouse then explained that the lawyer pressured him into entering the plea without explaining the law to him, and that he had later learned that he had a valid defense to the charge. The lawyer informed the court that given Rouse’s allegation he would have “a conflict, I wouldn’t be able to represent him any further on this.” The trial court agreed that the current lawyer could not represent Rouse in connection with the motion to withdraw plea, because of the conflict created by Rouse’s allegations, but informed Rouse that he would need to handle any allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel by post-conviction motion. The judge then simply denied the motion to withdraw plea without appointing conflict-free counsel and without affording Rouse a hearing on the motion. The matter proceeded to sentencing.
“IWJhen a patent conflict of interest arises between counsel and client in a motion to withdraw proceeding, the court has a duty to offer the client conflict-free counsel.” Carmona v. State, 873 So. 2d 348, 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); see also, Smith v. State, 845 So. 2d 937, 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (recognizing when a conflict of interest between a defendant and his counsel “appears in the record, the trial court is obligated to appoint conflict-free counsel to represent the defendant”). Given Rouse’s allegations, we find that the trial court erred by failing to appoint conflict-free counsel, and by summarily denying Rouse’s motion without appointing a lawyer to aid Rouse in presenting evidence and argument in support of the motion. Id. Therefore, we reverse Rouse’s conviction and sentence. We remand for the appointment of conflict-free counsel, and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PALMER, C.J., and GRIFFIN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sheppard v. State, 17 So. 3d 275 (Fla. 2009)…fendant has arisen and the defendant’s allegations are not conclusively refuted by the record,9 the court should either permit counsel to withdraw or discharge counsel and appoint conflict-free counsel to represent the defendant. See Rouse v. State, 990 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (holding that trial court erred in failing to appoint conflict-free counsel and summarily denying motion after defendant alleged, in part, that counsel pressured him into entering the plea); Scippio v. State, 855 So. 2d 202, 203…
-
Angeles v. State, 279 So. 3d 836 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)…der rule 3.170(l). See Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)(c). Counsel's assertion that the plea was unknowing and involuntary due to counsel's failure to provide sufficient information set forth a facially sufficient claim. See Rouse v. State, 990 So. 2d 1197, 1198 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Smith v. State, 845 So. 2d 937, 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). The allegations that counsel performed deficiently in failing to properly advise Angeles during the plea process also established an adversarial relationship suc…
-
Tharin R. Harvey v. State, 4 So. 3d 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…his plea prior to sentencing, based on dissatisfaction with counsel’s representation, and counsel agrees that he cannot effectively advise the defendant, there is a conflict and appointment of conflict-free counsel is necessary. See Rouse v. State, 990 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). REVERSED and REMANDED. PALMER, C.J. and SAWAYA, J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 845 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
- Carmona v. State, 873 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)