ERIC DAMONT DAVIS, 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.
Eric Damont Davis appealed his conviction for aggravated battery with a firearm, challenging the trial court's competency determination on three grounds. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction but remanded for entry of a formal written order documenting the trial court's finding of competency, as signed court minutes alone do not constitute a proper order under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.
The trial court did not err in conducting the competency hearing or making an independent determination of competency. However, the trial court erred by failing to enter a formal written order, as signed court minutes do not constitute an order under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
[1] A trial court may determine a defendant's competency to proceed based solely on written reports.
[2] A trial court must enter a written order finding a defendant competent to proceed.
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“finding trial court may decide issue of competency based on written reports alone but must enter written order if defendant is found competent to proceed”
Establishes the standard that while written reports alone can support a competency decision, a written order is required
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavis was convicted by jury of aggravated battery with a firearm. The trial court conducted a competency hearing and determined Davis was competent to…
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 Aggravated Battery With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
Eric Damont Davis appeals the judgment and sentence entered against him after he was convicted by a jury of aggravated battery with a firearm. He argues the trial court erred by a) conducting an insufficient competency hearing; b) failing to make an independent competency determination; and c) failing to enter a written order on competency. We disagree with Davis' assertion that the trial court conducted an insufficient hearing and failed to make an independent determination of his competency. See Dougherty v. State, 149 So.3d 672, 679 (Fla. 2014) (finding trial court may decide issue of competency based on written reports alone but must enter written order if defendant is found competent to proceed). Nevertheless, because the court minutes signed by the trial judge reflecting this determination do not constitute an order, we remand for entry of a written order finding Davis competent to proceed. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(f) (defining order as "[a] decision, order, judgment, decree, or rule of a lower tribunal, excluding minutes and minute book entries"); see also State v. Wagner, 863 So.2d 1224, 1228 (Fla. 2004) ("Because the signed court minutes form was not an order within the definition of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, the act of filing it with the court clerk did not amount to the rendition of an order."); Carroll v. State, 157 So.3d 385, 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ("Even when the trial court has previously made a written finding of competency on a signed 'minutes' form, this still does not satisfy the requirement to enter an order as set forth by the rules of criminal procedure."). In all other respects, we affirm.
AFFIRMED in part; REMANDED with instructions.
BERGER, EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pavilus v. State, 240 So. 3d 892 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…3) failing to enter a written order on competency. The record refutes the defendant's arguments that the trial court conducted an insufficient competency hearing and failed to make an independent determination of his competency. See Davis v. State, 239 So. 3d 202 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). Nevertheless, because the trial court failed to enter a written order reflecting its oral finding of competency announced at the hearing, we remand for the entry of a written order, nunc pro tunc to the date when the oral ruling…
-
Marshall v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)…pronouncement reflected in the court minutes of the violation of probation hearing does not constitute an order, even though the minutes are signed by the trial judge. See State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224, 1226 (Fla. 2004); see also Davis v. State, 239 So. 3d 202 (Fla. 5th ---PAGE 3--- revoking probation must state in writing the conditions the trial court found a defendant to have violated. See Hoeft v. State, 351 So. 3d 666 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022); Font v. State, 299 So. 3d 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020); cf. Pat…
-
Williams v. State, 255 So. 3d 534 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
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)
- State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2004)
- Connell L. Carroll v. State, 157 So. 3d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)