Monroe v. State

• Decision Date: 09 January 1979
• Docket Number: No. 77-2484,77-2484
• Citation: 369 So.2d 962
• Parties: Michael MONROE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 962

369 So.2d 962

Michael MONROE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-2484.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 9, 1979.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 5, 1979.

Alvin E. Entin and Ronald A. Dion, Miami, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Anthony C. Musto, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sharon Langer, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON and KEHOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Michael Monroe, appeals his conviction for second degree murder and robbery based upon a plea of nolo contendere tendered subsequent to the denial of his motion to suppress his conviction. The salient facts are as follows:

On April 19, 1977 ¹ Monroe was extradited from New York to the Dade County jail on a charge of first degree murder and a preliminary hearing was scheduled. The office of the public defender was appointed to represent Monroe; however, upon examining Monroe's file, they discovered a possible conflict between representation of Monroe and his co-defendant and on the same day (April 19) filed a certificate of conflict with the trial court. On April 20 Officers Stonbreaker and Tootle, who were not aware that Monroe had counsel, went to the county jail and spoke to him. ² After advising Monroe of his rights, including the right to counsel which he waived, he agreed to accompany the officers to the State Attorney's office for the purpose of giving a statement to the prosecutor who mistakenly believed that Monroe was not represented by counsel because of the filing of the certificate of conflict by the public defender. After making a statement which in effect denied any participation in the murder, Monroe, at the request of the police officers, indicated he would submit to a polygraph examination. After undergoing the examination, the examiner confronted Monroe with the results which reflect that some of his answers were deceptive. Monroe confessed participation in the murder to the examiner who turned him over to the investigating officers. The officers again advised him of his rights and Monroe again confessed. On April 21 the public defender was allowed to withdraw and private counsel was appointed. Thereafter, on April 28 Monroe was indicted by the grand jury for murder in the first degree and pled not guilty. Defense counsel moved to suppress the confession on the ground it was obtained in violation of Monroe's right to counsel in that at no time was Monroe advised that he already had counsel, nor was counsel advised of the investigation. After a hearing, the trial judge determined that the confession was freely and voluntarily given after Monroe knowingly and intelligently waived his rights, including the right to counsel. Thereupon, the motion to suppress was denied and defense counsel entered into plea bargain negotiations with the prosecution. It was agreed that the indictment for first degree murder be withdrawn and in lieu thereof, an information for second degree murder and robbery would be filed. In exchange Monroe tendered a plea of nolo contendere to the charges in the information and preserved his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress his confession.

Monroe basically argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because he was not made aware that he had court-appointed counsel, nor was his counsel informed of or present at the interrogation. In support of his argument, Monroe relies upon the holding in Massiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201, 84 S.Ct. 1199, 12 L.Ed.2d 246 (1964) that under the constitutional...