CHARLES EDWARD BETTS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
A defendant whose timely notice of appeal was not filed due to lack of a filing fee, despite the trial court's appointment of a public defender within the appeal period, is entitled to proceed with his appeal under the doctrine that state action depriving a defendant of appellate review constitutes grounds for habeas corpus relief.
A defendant whose notice of appeal was not filed due to administrative failure to process an insolvency order, despite timely appointment of counsel, may proceed with his appeal via habeas corpus because state action deprived him of appellate review.
[1] When a defendant is deprived of appellate review by state action despite timely appointment of counsel, habeas corpus relief is available to permit the defendant to proce…
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 intelligenceThe trial court appointed a public defender to represent the defendant on appeal within the required time period, but the notice of appeal was not act…
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 Public Defender Appointment cases and more on FLexlaw
In this petition for a writ of habeas corpus, it appears that a timely notice of appeal was actually filed by the petitioner, but due to the fact there did not appear in the Clerk’s Office (trial court clerk) an order adjudging the defendant insolvent, the notice of appeal was not actually filed for lack of the $25.00 filing fee.
The Circuit Court had entered an order stating that “it appearing to the court that defendant has been adjudged insolvent,” and thereupon appointed the public defender to represent the defendant on this appeal.
It appears to us from the petition and accompanying exhibits, that the petitioner’s direct appeal in this court, was attempted to be filed pro se, within the required time. The case appeared before us as Case No. L-482 with the notice of appeal, filed by the public defender in June 1969, which was more than 30 days after the rendition of the order appealed from, but, it appearing that the public defender was appointed by the Circuit Court on March 11, 1969, to represent the defendant on appeal, which was within time for a timely appeal, and inasmuch as the defendant was deprived of his direct appeal on the merits by state action (action of the public defender) under the theory of Hollingshead v. State, we do hereby authorize the petitioner to proceed with his appeal, and do direct the Public Defender of Escambia County to represent *192said defendant on his appeal. If the public defender desires, he may request this court to consider his brief filed in our case No. L-482 as his brief in this appeal.
WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.