ROBERT LEE BRYANT, 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 the denial of counsel at sentencing is a critical stage requiring reversal.
Appellant pleaded guilty to robbery, was placed on probation, and later had probation revoked and was sentenced. He alleged he was denied counsel at s…
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 Critical Stage Of Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
Robert Lee Bryant, the appellant, appeals an order denying his motion for relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix. He alleged that he was indigent and that he neither waived counsel nor was afforded the opportunity to have counsel when his probation was revoked and when he was sentenced to the State prison.
The record reveals that appellant was charged, pleaded guilty, and was adjudged guilty of the crime of robbery. The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed the appellant on probation for a term of three years. At all stages of the proceedings he was represented by counsel of his own choice. The order placing defendant on probation was dated August 12, 1963. Subsequently, appellant was charged with the violation of his probation, and probation was revoked on October 20, 1965. He was then sentenced to a term of five years. On May 5, 1966, appellant filed his petition for relief which was denied on the basis that the motion was insufficient in substance to support the relief prayed. This appeal followed.
The State has admitted that the record does not reveal that appellant had counsel or waived counsel at the time of sentencing. See Evans v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So.2d 520, 522. The imposition of sentence is a critical stage in the trial, and the defendant is entitled to assistance of counsel at that time. Phillips v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 246. We therefore reverse the order denying relief and remand the cause for an evidentiary hearing upon the appellant’s allegation that he was not afforded the opportunity to be represented by counsel at the *22time of sentencing. See Langlois v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So.2d 284.
Appellant’s allegation that he was denied a constitutional right when he was not represented or afforded the opportunity of representation by counsel on the revocation of his probation is not a ground for relief. Thomas v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So.2d 328; Phillips v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 246.
Reversed and remanded for evidentiary hearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
van Cleaf v. State, 328 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)…ch this court stated: “Florida courts have held that a probationer’s lack of counsel at a proceeding at which probation is revoked and sentence is imposed voids the sentence but not the order of revocation itself. See Bryant v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So. 2d 21-22; Phillips v. State, FIa.App.1964, 165 So. 2d 246, 247. The United States Supreme Court, however, has since ruled that such lack of counsel renders the entire proceeding subject to collateral attack, ‘whether it be labeled a revocation of probatio…
-
Herrington v. State, 207 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…s filed by appellant. Florida courts have held that a probationer’s lack of counsel at a proceeding at which’ probation is revoked and sentence is imposed voids the sentence but not the order of revocation itself. See Bryant v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So. 2d 21-22; Phillips v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So. 2d 246, 247. The United States Supreme Court, however, has since ruled that such lack of counsel renders the entire proceeding subject to collateral attack, “whether it be labeled a revocation of probatio…
-
Wingard v. State, 200 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Evans v. State, 163 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Steil v. Starling, 165 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Thomas v. State, 163 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Baker v. State, 191 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)
- Langlois v. State, 191 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)