JAKOBIE MILTON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Jakobie Milton appeals his judgment and sentence for possession of a firearm by a felon and resisting an officer without violence, challenging the trial court's failure to enter a written competency determination before accepting his nolo contendere plea. Although a psychological evaluation found Milton competent to proceed, the trial court never formally documented this finding in writing. The appellate court reverses and remands for the trial court to enter a competency determination.
A trial court must enter a written order determining that a defendant is competent to proceed before accepting a plea. The trial court's failure to enter such an order requires reversal. On remand, the trial court may determine competency nunc pro tunc based on previously existing evidence if that evidence supports a finding of competency, but if unable to make such a determination or if it finds incompetency, a new trial must be held.
[1] A trial court must enter a written order determining whether a defendant is competent to proceed before accepting a guilty or no contest plea and imposing sentence.
[2] On remand, if evidence previously before the trial court supports a finding of competency at the time of the original trial, the court may retroactively enter a competenc…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“The trial court's failure to enter a written order requires reversal.”
Court's statement of the legal error requiring reversal in this case
Milton moved for appointment of an expert to evaluate his competency to proceed, and the trial court appointed one. A psychological evaluation conclud…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.210(B) cases and more on FLexlaw
_____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County. Jan Shackelford, Judge.
April 22, 2019 PER CURIAM.
Jakobie Milton appeals his judgment and sentence after entering a nolo contendere plea to charges of possession of a firearm by a felon and resisting an officer without violence. Milton’s attorney requested appointment of an expert, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.210(b), to determine Milton’s competency to proceed to trial. Finding reasonable grounds in support of the motion, the trial court appointed an expert. Milton underwent a psychological evaluation, which concluded he was competent, albeit marginally, to proceed. Defense counsel orally advised the trial court of the evaluation findings.
Milton accepted the State’s plea offer and pleaded no contest to the charges. At the hearing, the trial court noted the evaluation ultimately found Milton competent to proceed. But, the trial court accepted Milton’s plea and imposed sentence without entering an order determining that Milton was competent to proceed. The trial court’s failure to enter a written order requires reversal. Sheheane v. State, 228 So. 3d 1178, 1180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
On remand, the trial court must address competency. Id. at 1181. If the evidence that existed previously supports a finding that the defendant was competent at the time of trial, the trial court may decide competence, nunc pro tunc, with no change in the judgment. Id.; see also Brooks v. State, 180 So. 3d 1094, 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). However, if the trial court is unable to make a retroactive competency determination or if it finds Milton was incompetent, it must hold a new trial, as long as Milton is and remains competent on remand. Sheheane, 228 So. 3d at 1181; Zern v. State, 191 So. 3d 962, 965 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and ROWE and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ Jakobie Milton, pro se; Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Itanzhia Jarariyah-Waliya Bowie v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)
Authorities Cited
- Zern v. State, 191 So. 3d 962 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
- Brooks v. State, 180 So. 3d 1094 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
- Sheheane v. State, 228 So. 3d 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)