ROBERT LEE ROSS, 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 reversed the summary denial of a motion for relief, finding that an evidentiary hearing was necessary to determine if the defendant was denied his right to counsel when counsel was appointed on the day of trial.
The court held that a full evidentiary hearing is required to determine if the defendant was prejudiced by the late appointment of counsel and thus denied his right to effective representation.
“this court has held that the right of a criminal defendant to be represented by counsel includes having an attorney appointed a reasonable time before trial, in order that the attorney may have an opportunity to confer with the accused and to prepare for trial.”
Establishes the general principle regarding the timing of counsel appointment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was convicted of carnal intercourse with an unmarried female idiot and was serving a sentence. He filed a motion for relief, alleging hi…
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 Effective Assistance Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a summary denial of the defendant’s motion for relief brought pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. Chapter 924 Appendix.
The defendant is serving a sentence following conviction for carnal intercourse with an unmarried female idiot. He alleges that his right to counsel was effectively denied when the court appointed counsel to defend him on the day of his trial. After one conference with his appointed counsel, the defendant entered a plea of guilty. Thereafter, the state called certain witnesses, including a doctor who testified as to the mental deficiency of the victim.
This court has held that the right of a criminal defendant to be represented by counsel includes having an attorney appointed a reasonable time before trial, in order that the attorney may have an opportunity to confer with the accused and to prepare for trial. We recognize that the time required may vary depending on the nature and complexities of the case.1
We are unable to determine from examination of the record whether the time involved under the circumstances of this case prejudiced the rights of the defendant.
We find that a full evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine whether the defendant was subjected to trial without representation as called for in the Gideon case.2
Accordingly the order appealed from is reversed and the cause is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Duckett, 40 Fla. Supp. 80 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1973)…ive assistace of court-appointed counsel. This court finds that the trial court committed prejudicial error in forcing the public defender to trial on the very day of appointment. French v. State, 161 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 1st Dist. 1964); Ross v. State, 181 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 3d Dist. 1966); Watson v. State, 169 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 3d Dist. 1964). As definitively stated by the Third District Court of Appeal in Watson, supra, on facts nearly identical to those at bar — “The right of a criminal defendant to be represen…
Authorities Cited
- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (U.S. 1963)
- Watson v. State, 169 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)