Smith v. State, 91-00702
| Decision Date | 20 December 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-00702,91-00702 |
| Citation | 590 So.2d 1078 |
| Parties | Michael SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 590 So.2d 1078, 17 Fla. L. Week. D120 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow, and Brad Permar, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Anne Y. Swing, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Michael Smith appeals his conviction and sentence for burglary of a dwelling. The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the trial court erred in sentencing Smith without renewing the offer of counsel.
It appears that Smith was gainfully employed at the time of his arrest, such that the county court at first appearance refused to appoint the public defender. Smith subsequently appeared for arraignment without counsel, and entered a plea of no contest. However, at sentencing Smith inquired whether the court would agree to appoint the public defender. He stated that he had lost his job in the interim since first appearance and could no longer afford a private attorney. The court informed Smith that while "a public defender can stand by you for the sentencing process ... you have already pled guilty." The court then proceeded to impose sentence without appointing counsel.
An indigent defendant has the right to the assistance of counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings against him, including sentencing. A prior waiver of counsel is not sufficient to waive defendant's rights at a later date. Machwart v. State, 222 So.2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Faced with Smith's request for counsel, the trial court should have determined whether he qualified for the services of the public defender as of that time. Cf. Cooper v. State, 576 So.2d 1379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Accordingly, we must remand this case for a new sentencing hearing.
Reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilson v. State
...Trial, sentencing, and direct appeal are all critical stages at which a defendant is entitled to counsel. See Smith v. State, 590 So.2d 1078, 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (treating right to counsel at sentencing as a critical stage); Ford v. State, 575 So.2d 1335, 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (recog......
-
Padgett v. State
...1994). Trial, sentencing and direct appeal are all critical stages at which a defendant is entitled to counsel. See Smith v. State, 590 So.2d 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)(right to counsel at sentencing); Ford v. State, 575 So.2d 1335, 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA)(right to counsel on appeal)(citing Dougla......
-
Searcy v. State
...See Sandoval v. State, 884 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Padgett v. State, 743 So.2d 70, 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Smith v. State, 590 So.2d 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) ("An indigent defendant has the right to the assistance of counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings against him, ......
-
Sandoval v. State, 2D03-1347.
...right to the assistance of counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings against him, including sentencing." Smith v. State, 590 So.2d 1078, 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). "[T]he time for sentencing is one of those critical stages at which the defendant should be represented by counsel." Eva......