Matthews v. State, 90-01713
| Decision Date | 21 August 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-01713,90-01713 |
| Citation | 584 So.2d 1105 |
| Parties | Robert A. MATTHEWS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 584 So.2d 1105, 16 Fla. L. Week. D2228 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Andrea Norgard, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corces, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
The appellant, Robert A. Matthews, challenges the judgment and sentence imposed upon him after he was found guilty of robbery. We reverse.
Prior to the appellant's trial on the charge of robbery, his court appointed attorney, at the appellant's request, filed a motion to withdraw as the appellant's attorney. The appellant requested that a new attorney be appointed because he disagreed with the attorney's decision to file a written plea of not guilty rather than have the appellant appear for a formal arraignment. The trial court found that the attorney was adequately representing the appellant and denied the motion. The court also found, without making an inquiry on the record, that the appellant was not able to represent himself in a jury trial.
On the day of trial, before the jury was empaneled, the appellant again requested that a new attorney be appointed to represent him. In response to questions by the court, the appellant stated that the attorney was not adequately representing him and that she failed to visit him at the jail or communicate with him. The court found that the appellant's attorney was adequately representing him and denied the appellant's request for a new attorney. The court noted, as it had at the hearing on the attorney's motion to withdraw, that the appellant had established a pattern of discharging counsel and had done so in many previous cases. As a result of the appellant's disruptive behavior in response to the trial court's refusal to appoint a new attorney, the trial court ordered the appellant to be tried in absentia. The jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged. The appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the judgment and sentence imposed upon him pursuant to that verdict.
The appellant contends that the trial court erred by failing to make the proper inquiries and to give him the proper advice concerning his right of representation. On the basis of the record presented to us, we must agree. 1
When a defendant requests the trial court to discharge his court appointed attorney and replace him with another appointed attorney, the court should first determine whether adequate grounds exist for replacement of the defendant's attorney. Nelson v. State, 274 So.2d 256 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). See also Hardwick v. State, 521 So.2d 1071 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 871, 109 S.Ct. 185, 102 L.Ed.2d 154 (1988). If the court finds that the defendant, as in this case, has no legitimate complaint, it is then required to advise the defendant that if his request to discharge his attorney is granted, the court is not required to appoint substitute counsel and the defendant would be exercising his right to represent himself. Hardwick; Taylor v. State, 557 So.2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). At this point, if the defendant still desires to discharge his counsel, the court must determine whether the defendant is knowingly and intelligently waiving his right to court appointed counsel. Faretta v. California, 422...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bowen v. State
...So.2d 768 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), relied upon both Cappetta and Robinson for the "special circumstances" test, and then in Matthews v. State, 584 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), perpetuated the necessity for a more stringent examination of the defendant by referring to Williams. Most recently, i......
-
Jones v. State
...procedure of Nelson ), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 871, 109 S.Ct. 185, 102 L.Ed.2d 154 (1988). We followed Nelson in Matthews v. State, 584 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). We further noted in Matthews that if a defendant's complaints about court-appointed counsel are found to be meritless, a tria......
-
Rutledge v. State
...disapproved of on other grounds, Heuss v. State, 687 So.2d 823, 824 (Fla.1996); Nelson, 274 So.2d at 259. In Matthews v. State, 584 So.2d 1105, 1106-07 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), the appellate court set this procedure out as a If the court finds that the defendant, as in this case, has no legitima......
-
Compo v. State
...DCA 1963). Compo would then be required to choose between self-representation and continuing with the public defender. Matthews v. State, 584 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). The State of Florida, as appellant in appeal 92-03321, has requested an extension of time of thirty days to file its i......