RICHARD A. MORSE, JR., 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.
Richard Morse petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel his former public defender to provide free copies of crime scene photographs from his trial. The Florida appellate court held that Morse, an indigent defendant with court-appointed counsel, has a clear legal right to receive copies of documents in his appointed counsel's file without charge, including discovery materials like crime scene photos.
An indigent defendant is entitled to receive free copies of all documents in his former appointed counsel's file, including crime scene photographs obtained during discovery. The fact that the defendant was allowed to view the photographs during the discovery process does not eliminate his entitlement to free copies of those materials.
[1] A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus must establish a clear legal right to performance of the act requested, an indisputable legal duty, and no adequate remedy at l…
[2] An indigent defendant is entitled to receive, at no cost, copies of discovery materials from their court-appointed 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“A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus must establish a clear legal right to performance of the act requested, an indisputable legal duty, and no adequate remedy at law.”
Establishes the three-part test for mandamus relief that Morse must satisfy
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMorse's public defender obtained and copied crime scene photographs during the discovery process and allowed Morse to view them. After trial, Morse pe…
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 Petition For Writ Of Mandamus cases and more on FLexlaw
Richard A. Morse, Jr., filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel his former counsel, the Public Defender for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, to provide free-of-charge copies of the crime scene photos from his trial. We hold that the circuit court erred when it denied his petition.
“A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus must establish a clear legal right to performance of the act requested, an indisputable legal duty, and no adequate remedy at law.” Radford v. Brock, 914 So.2d 1066, 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (citing Smith v. State, 696 So.2d 814, 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)). Morse stated a facially sufficient claim establishing entitlement to free copies of the photos from his court-appointed counsel. See id.; Potts v. State, 869 So.2d 1223, 1225 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (holding that “transcripts that were prepared at public expense on behalf of an indigent defendant must be provided to the defendant without charge for copying”).
The circuit court held that Morse was not entitled to relief because his public defender inspected and copied the photographs during the discovery process. And since his attorney allowed him to see the photos, the court reasoned that Morse was not entitled to any additional rights outside of the discovery process. However, the fact that the State provided the photos to defense counsel, and counsel copied them, does not limit Morse’s entitlement to documents in his appointed counsel’s file. See Smith v. State, 889 So.2d 1009, 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (“The petitioner is entitled to receive from his former counsel, at no cost to petitioner, any and all trial and hearing transcripts, copies of motions, *751and any state discovery presented to defense counsel”) (emphasis added).
We therefore reverse and remand for the postconviction court to grant the petition and to order Morse’s counsel to provide copies of the crime scene photographs to Morse free-of-charge.1
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
NORTHCUTT and KELLY, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Roland v. State, 120 So. 3d 103 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…ems. We reverse and remand for further proceedings. “ ‘A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus must establish a clear legal right to performance of the act requested, an indisputable legal duty, and no adequate remedy at law.’ ” Morse v. State, 50 So. 3d 750, 750 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (quoting Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066, 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)). Mr. Roland stated a facially sufficient claim that established a prima facie case of entitlement to free copies of the discovery evidence from regional cou…
-
Rojas v. Off. OF THE Pub. Def., 102 So. 3d 774 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…cur. . Although, Mr. Tedder expressed concerns about the graphic nature of the photographs that Rojas seeks, it is for the Department of Corrections to determine whether Rojas should be restricted from receiving the photographs. See Morse v. State, 50 So. 3d 750 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).…
-
Fedena Fanord v. Univ. of S. Fla. (13th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Kurtis J. Smith v. State, 696 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Potts v. State, 869 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Mills v. State, 889 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
- Weeks v. Golden, 798 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)