DANIELLE L. HANCOCK
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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's determination of the defendant's competency to stand trial but remanded the case for the trial court to issue a written order reflecting its oral ruling.
The trial court did not err in its competency determination, but it did err by failing to issue a written order. The conviction is affirmed, but the case is remanded for the entry of a written order.
[1] A trial court's competency determination, though substantively correct, must be reduced to a written order to comply with procedural requirements.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“We find the trial court did not err in making its competency determination; it did, however, neglect to put its oral ruling in writing.”
Establishes the court's finding on both the competency determination and the procedural error.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was found competent to stand trial by the trial court. However, the trial court failed to reduce its oral ruling to a written order.…
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 Written Order Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
Nos. 1D17-4151 1D17-4153
(consolidated for disposition) _____________________________
DANIELLE L. HANCOCK,
Appellant,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Wakulla County. James O. Shelfer, Judge.
August 29, 2019 PER CURIAM.
We find the trial court did not err in making its competency determination; it did, however, neglect to put its oral ruling in writing. We, therefore, affirm but remand for entry of a written order. McCray v. State, 265 So. 3d 659 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).
AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions.
WOLF, B.L. THOMAS, and BILBREY, JJ., concur.
2
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________
Office of Candice K. Brower, Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, and Melissa J. Ford, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Anne C. Conley and Damaris E, Reynolds, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.