KENNETH RAY HENRY, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Kenneth Ray Henry, adjudicated incompetent to stand trial due to intellectual disability, petitioned for certiorari review of the trial court's denial of his motion to dismiss charges under Florida law. The appellate court granted the petition, holding that the trial court failed to comply with statutory and rule requirements for denying such a motion, and remanded for dismissal without prejudice.
The court granted the petition and held that the trial court's order denying dismissal was not in compliance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.213(a)(2) and Florida Statutes section 916.303(1). The trial court may only deny a motion to dismiss by specifying reasons for believing the defendant will become competent and providing an expected timeframe for competency; absent such findings, dismissal without prejudice is required.
[1] Charges must be dismissed without prejudice if a defendant adjudicated incompetent due to intellectual disability or autism is not expected to become competent within the…
[2] A court must specify the reasons for believing a defendant will become competent in the foreseeable future and the expected timeframe for competency to avoid dismissing c…
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“An individual who has been adjudicated incompetent is presumed to remain incompetent until adjudicated competent to proceed by a court.”
Establishes the presumption governing incompetency proceedings and the burden required to override it
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHenry was found incompetent to proceed due to intellectual disability on May 17, 2013. On May 18, 2015, he filed a motion to dismiss charges without p…
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 Presumption Of Incompetence cases and more on FLexlaw
Kenneth Ray Henry petitions this Court for certiorari review of the denial of his motion to dismiss under section 916.303(1), Florida Statutes (2013). We grant the petition and remand for dismissal of the charges without prejudice-to the State to refile should Henry become competent in, the future.
On May 17, 2013, Henry was found incompetent to proceed due to intellectual *929disability. On May 18, 2015, he filed for dismissal of the charges without prejudice under section 916.303(1). In response, the State moved to strike the motion to dismiss, or alternatively, to appoint two doctors to evaluate Henry. Giving the State the benefit of the doubt, we interpret that motion as a motion for a determination of competency..
“An individual who has been adjudicated incompetent is presumed to remain incompetent until adjudicated competent to proceed by a court.” Dougherty v. State, 149 So.3d 672, 676 (Fla.2014) (quoting Jackson v. State, 880 So.2d 1241, 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). The process for adjudicating such a defendant competent is properly instigated upon a report finding that the defendant has regained competency to proceed or no longer meets the criteria for continued commitment issued by the administrator of the facility in which 'the defendant is being held. Molina v. State, 946 So.2d 1103, 1105 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (citing Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.212(c)(5)). Alternatively, counsel for either the defendant or the State may move the court for such an adjudication of competency. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.212(c)(5)(B). If, upon consideration of such a motion and any information offered in support thereof, the court has reasonable grounds to believe the defendant is competent, it must order a report from the administrator on the issues and order a hearing to be held. Id.
It does not appear that any information was offered at the hearing on the State’s motion to indicate that Henry is now, or will within the foreseeable future become, competent. Despite having filed an objection to the motion to dismiss, the prosecutor had no knowledge regarding Henry’s competency. Denial of the motion to dismiss would be permitted only if the court specified its reasons for determining that Henry would become competent in the foreseeable future and provided an expected timeframe- for competency. § 916.303(1), Fla. Stat. (2013). This procedure is more clearly set out in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.213(a)(2), which states:
If the incompetency to stand trial or to proceed is due to intellectual disability or autism, the court shall dismiss the charges within a reasonable time after suchdetermination, not to exceed 2 years for felony charges and 1 year for misdemeanor charges, unless the court specifies in its order the reasons for believing that the defendant will become competent; within the foreseeable future and specifies -the time within which the defendant is expected to become competent. The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the state to refile should the .defendant be declared competent to proceed in the .future-. . .
Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.213(a)(2).
The order denying Henry’s motion to dismiss was not in compliance with the procedure set out in this rule and the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Dougherty, 149 So.3d at 676-77, and is a departure from the essential requirements of, the law. See also Gonzalez v. State, 15 So.3d 37, 41 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Hines v. State, 931 So.2d 148, 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
Therefore, the petition .is granted. The order denying dismissal is.quashed and the cause is remanded for dismissal of the charges without prejudice to the State’s right to refile, should Henry become competent in the future,
PETITION GRANTED.
ORFINGER, COHEN, and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't of Child. & Families v. State of Fla. & William Elvey, 48 Fla. L. Weekly D1971 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)…adjudged incompetent due to mental illness in May 2022 and placed on conditional release. “An individual who has been adjudicated incompetent is presumed to remain incompetent until adjudicated competent to proceed by a court.” See Henry v. State, 178 So. 3d 928, 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (citing Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672, 676 (Fla. 2014)); see also Abreu-Gutierrez v. James, 1 So. 3d 262, 264–65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Upon Elvey’s violating conditional release, the trial court correctly (and unlike in…
-
Holly v. State, 187 So. 3d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…ant. See Vazquez v. State, 496 So. 2d, 818, 820 (Fla.1986). Further, we agree with Holly that “[a]n individual who has been adjudicated incompetent is presumed to remain incompetent until adjudicated competent to proceed by á court.” Henry v. State, 178 So. 3d 928, 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (quoting Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672, 676 (Fla.2014)). Nevertheless, our present record does not contain an order specifically finding Holly to be incompetent to proceed due to intellectual disability or autism, which…
-
Shemar Latrell Anthony v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2021)…smiss the charges against him, arguing that it had been more than two years since he was found incompetent due to intellectual disability, and the court had never deemed his competency restored. Anthony pointed out similar results in Henry v. State, 178 So. 3d 928 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015), and Hines v. State, 931 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), and highlighted the requirements of section 916.303(1), Florida Statutes (2021). He acknowledged that dismissal would be without prejudice to the State’s ability to refil…
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
- Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672 (Fla. 2014)
- Molina v. State, 946 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Cornell Jackson v. State, 880 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Gonzalez v. State, 15 So. 3d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
- Hines v. State, 931 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)