Plank v. State
Decision Date | 29 January 2014 |
Docket Number | No. 1D13–4458.,1D13–4458. |
Citation | 130 So.3d 289 |
Parties | Noel PLANK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. Angela C. Dempsey, Judge.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Colleen D. Mullen, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
William N. Meggs, State Attorney, and Charles Dewrell, Assistant State Attorney, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING, CLARIFICATION, REQUEST FOR WRITTEN OPINION, AND CERTIFICATION OF CONFLICT
We deny Appellant's motion for rehearing, but grant his motion for a written opinion and substitute this opinion in place of our previously issued per curiam affirmance.
Appellant was found guilty of direct criminal contempt and sentenced to 30 days in jail for arriving drunk to jury duty and disrupting the process of jury selection. He raises three issues in this direct appeal. We affirm two of the issues without further comment, and affirm the remaining issue for the reasons that follow.
Appellant argues that the trial court erred by not appointing him counsel or giving him an opportunity to seek counsel for the contempt proceeding. We affirm on the authority of Williams v. State, 698 So.2d 1350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), and Saunders v. State, 319 So.2d 118 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), in which this court held that a defendant does not have a right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment or the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure when charged with direct criminal contempt. Accord Searcy v. State, 971 So.2d 1008, 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Forbes v. State, 933 So.2d 706, 711 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); see also In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, 274–75, 68 S.Ct. 499, 92 L.Ed. 682 (1948) ( )(internal quotations and ellipses omitted); In re Terry, 128 U.S. 289, 313, 9 S.Ct. 77, 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888) ( ).
We recognize that the Second District held in Woods v. State, 987 So.2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), and Al–Hakim v. State, 53 So.3d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), that a defendant has a right to counsel under the Florida Rules of Criminal...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Plank v. State
...before incarceration is imposed as punishment. The First District Court of Appeal rejected that argument in Plank v. State, 130 So.3d 289, 290 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), but certified that its decision is in direct conflict with the decisions of the Second District Court of Appeal in Al–Hakim v. ......
-
Pole v. State
...agrees. See Hayes v. State, 592 So.2d 327, 329 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). However, the First District holds otherwise. See Plank v. State, 130 So.3d 289, 290 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). Because of this interdistrict conflict, the supreme court agreed to hear Plank to determine “whether an individual is ......
-
Brown v. State
...is entitled to counsel in direct criminal contempt proceedings before incarceration is imposed as punishment. Plank v. State, 130 So.3d 289, 290 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), decision approved in part, quashed in part, 190 So.3d 594 (Fla. 2016). After addressing the issue in conflict,4 the supreme c......
-
Tunsil v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Comm'N&G4S Secure Solutions U.S. Inc., 1D13–2920.
... ... 1D13–2920 (1st DCA Dec. 11, 2013) (citing Bolton v. SE Property Holdings, LLC, 127 So.3d 746, 2013 WL 6171280 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov.2013), and State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999)). Tunsil responded with more of the same outrageous racial recriminations. Based on his response, this Court ... ...