WESTBERRY
v.
STATE
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.
A trial court that wishes to require a defendant's personal presence despite a valid written waiver must clearly advise the defendant and defense counsel that presence is required.
[1] A defendant may waive their right to be present at pretrial conferences under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3).
[2] A trial court may require a defendant's presence in court despite a written waiver if there is good reason to do so.
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“if there is good reason to do so, a trial court may require the presence of the defendant in court even when the defendant has filed a written waiver, [but] the trial court must clearly advise defense counsel and the defendant that the defendant's personal presence is required”
Statement of the governing rule from Charlemagne v. Guevara
Westberry was arrested for narcotics possession and properly filed a written waiver of her right to be present at pretrial conferences. When she faile…
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 Waiver Of Right To Be Present cases and more on FLexlaw
LOGUE, J.
Pamela Westberry petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus to quash an alias capias, or bench warrant, issued for her arrest. Based on well-established precedent and the State’s commendable confession of error, we grant the petition.
Westberry was arrested for possession of narcotics. Through counsel she filed a written waiver of her right to be present at pretrial conferences as authorized by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3). After the information was filed, she entered a plea of not guilty through counsel, which was accepted by the court. Later, when Westberry was not present at a hearing which the trial court had set to review plea negotiations, the trial court over objection issued an alias capias, concluding that Westberry was “noticed to appear” and that “no good cause has been provided for her failure to appear.” Westberry then petitioned this court for a writ of habeas corpus.
The trial court erred because Westberry had properly waived her presence in court under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3). While, “if there is good reason to do so, a trial court may require the presence of the defendant in court even when the defendant has filed a written waiver,” the trial court must clearly advise defense counsel and the defendant that the defendant’s personal presence is required. Charlemagne v. Guevara, 183 So. 3d 1261, 1263 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2016) (citing Cruz v. State, 822 So. 2d 595, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)). Here,
the record does not indicate that the trial court clearly advised Westberry that her presence was required. The State has so conceded.
Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and quash the alias capias. This decision shall take effect immediately, notwithstanding the filing of any post-opinion motions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McCutchen v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
-
McCutchen v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
-
Key v. State (Fla. 6th DCA 2026)
Authorities Cited
- Belgica Nubia Cruz v. State, 822 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Jean-Elie Charlemagne v. Marydell Guevara, 183 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)