TILTON A. AUENSON AND MYRA S. AUENSON, APPELLANTS,
v.
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The final judgment from whence this appeal is taken is reversed on the authority of White v. Reserve Insurance Company, Fla.App., 299 So. 2d 661, opinion filed May 7, 1974, and Catches v. Government Employees Ins. Co., Fla.App., 295 So. 2d 116, opinion filed May 28, 1974. Appellants have filed a timely motion for the award of attorney’s fees in accordance with the Statute in such cases made and provided. The trial court shall take such evidence as is appropriate for making such determination, and shall fix appropriate compensation for the attorney for the appellants incident to this appeal.
SPECTOR, Acting C. J., and BOYER and McCORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hicks v. State, 452 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…ourts have uniformly held that one is entitled to counsel at a sentencing hearing for violation of probation. E.g., Thompson v. State, 413 So. 2d 1301, 1302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Woodard v. State, 351 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Simmons v. State, 298 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). Some years ago this court held in Gargan v. State, 217 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969), that a probationer was also entitled to counsel at a hearing held to determine whether his probation should be revoked. Later, Gagnon v. Scarp…
-
Woodard v. State, 351 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…tence. The decision in Mempa mandates the presence of counsel at sentencing, whether or not this occurs at the same time as revocation of probation. Thus the sentencing procedure was constitutionally defective and must be reversed. Simmons v. State, 298 So. 2d 206 (Fla.2d DCA 1974); Van Cleaf v. State, supra. Appellant asserts additional error in the sentencing procedure, but because our decision as stated affords him the opportunity for relief on this aspect of the case, we need not reach these arguments.…
-
Thompson v. State, 413 So. 2d 1301 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)…. The Mempa opinion continues to mandate an absolute right to be represented by counsel at sentencing and this is true even where sentencing is accomplished during or at the termination of a probation revocation hearing. See, e.g., Simmons v. State, 298 So. 2d 206 (Fla.2d DCA 1974). Appellant, Thompson, had not been convicted of the crime for which revocation of his probation was sought nor did he admit guilt. Accordingly, he was entitled to be represented by counsel at the hearing and sentencing. Proceedin…
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
- White v. Reserve Ins. Co., 299 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Catches v. Gov't Emps. INS. Co., 295 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)