HENRY ATKINS, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed conviction for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine because trial court failed to comply with appellate orders directing appointment of conflict-free counsel before ruling on plea withdrawal motion.
A trial court must comply with an appellate court's express remand orders and lacks power to deviate from them.
[1] When an appellate court issues a remand order with specific instructions for further proceedings, the trial court must strictly comply with those express directions and l…
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 intelligence“utterly lacks the power to deviate”
Describing the trial court's obligation to follow appellate remand orders with specific instructions
Henry Atkins was convicted of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine and appealed, seeking to withdraw his plea. The appellate court issued two orders direc…
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 Conspiracy To Traffic In Cocaine cases and more on FLexlaw
Henry Atkins, Appellant, appeals his judgment and sentence for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. After this Court issued two orders relinquishing jurisdiction directing the trial court to appoint conflict-free counsel to represent Appellant on his motion to withdraw his plea, the trial court failed to appoint counsel before summarily denying Appellant’s motion. Appellant argues, among other things, that the trial court erred when it failed to comply with this Court’s express orders. The State concedes error on this point. We agree and reverse.
It is well-settled in Florida that when an appellate court issues an order remanding with specific instructions for further proceedings, the lower court must adhere to those express directions and “utterly lacks the power to deviate.” Mendelson v. Mendelson, 341 So.2d 811, 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); see also Vega v. McDonough, 956 So.2d 1205, 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Mobley v. Mobley, 920 So.2d 97, 102 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Palma Sola Harbour Condo., Inc. v. Huber, 374 So.2d 1135, 1138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Consequently, we find that the trial court’s failure to appoint conflict-free counsel to represent Appellant on his motion to withdraw his plea before summarily denying the motion was in contravention of this Court’s orders and constitutes reversible error.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions for the trial court to appoint conflict-free counsel to represent Ap*447pellant and to reconsider the merits of Appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea.
REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.
WEBSTER, DAVIS, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Palma Sola Harbour Condo., Inc. v. Huber, 374 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Zoto's Int'l, Inc. v. Pinkus, 341 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Mendelson v. Lavine Mendelson, 341 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
- Vega v. McDONOUGH, 956 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Mobley v. Mobley, 920 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)