ALLEN MARTIN SWARTHOUT, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that a defendant's knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel is valid, even if counsel was offered and refused.
Appellant challenged his conviction for larceny of an automobile, arguing he was denied counsel. The record showed he was offered counsel, understood …
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 Collateral Attack On Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, instituted proceedings in the Criminal Court of Record of Dade County, pursuant to Criminal Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924, appendix, collaterally attacking the legality of his conviction and sentence for the commission of the crime of larceny of an automobile.
The basis of appellant’s motion is that the trial court erred in finding him guilty without his having had the benefit of counsel to represent him.
It affirmatively appears from the record that appellant plead guilty to the charge after he had been offered counsel by the court, and had refused to accept counsel. The trial judge correctly denied appellant relief on his motion pursuant to Rule 1 upon finding from the record that *774appellant understanding^- and intelligently waived his right to counsel.1
The trial judge did everything required of him to convince the accused that he should avail himself of the public defender’s services. Notwithstanding these efforts, the defendant refused to accept the court’s offer to appoint counsel. The court may not compel ,the accused to accept the services of an attorney, especially where, as here, the accused is intelligent and competent enough to understand the effect of his act. This court will not interfere with the factual finding by the trial judge where there is ample support for it in the record, as here.2
Accordingly the judgment appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Durcan v. State, 383 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…inal trial proceedings. We find that the trial judge’s order in this regard is amply supported by the evidence and, therefore, the appellant has made no error appear on the merits of the voluntariness of his waiver of jury trial. Swarthout v. State, 165 So. 2d 773 (Fla.3d DCA 1964); Carroll v. State, 186 So. 2d 834 (Fla.4th DCA 1966); Cash v. State, 207 So. 2d 18 (Fla.3d DCA 1968). Therefore, the order under review be and the same is hereby affirmed. Affirmed.…
-
Cash v. State, 207 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…n v. State, Fla.App.1967, 193 So. 2d 699; Plymale v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 201 So. 2d 85; Bryant v. State, supra. Unless there is no substantial evidence to support his conclusions, the trial judge will be affirmed. Swarthout v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So. 2d 773; Carroll v. State, Fla.App.1966, 186 So. 2d 834. The trial judge failed to find that perjured testimony was involved. A review of the record reveals [*19] that this conclusion is amply supported. Hall v. State, 136 Fla. 644, 187 So. 392; Gordon v. S…
-
Asa Cook v. State, 167 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)…gent or not; in fact, such course of action would in itself constitute an infringement upon an accused’s constitutional rights. The order of the trial court is affirmed. STURGIS, C. J., and WIGGINTON, and RAWLS, JJ., concur. . Swarthout v. State, 165 So. 2d 773 (Fla.App.3d, 1964).…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Conley v. State, 160 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Sardinia v. State, 162 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Hicks v. State, 165 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)