State v. Bryan
| Decision Date | 17 October 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 69--387,69--387 |
| Citation | 227 So.2d 221 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Plaintiff, v. Richard Henry BRYAN, Defendant. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for plaintiff.
Raymond E. LaPorte, of Ragano & LaPorte, Tampa, for defendant.
The following certified question comes to us from the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Judge James A. Lenfestey:
'Should a state attorney be disqualified by the trial court on motion of defendant from prosecuting said defendant for the reason that the state attorney was previously the public defender and his office represented the defendant on an unrelated charge approximately four years prior to the occurrence of the crime for which the defendant is presently charged?'
We are obliged to answer the question as abstractly phrased in the negative. The Mere fact that the State Attorney was formerly the Public Defender when defendant was tried for a prior crime and represented by the Public Defender's office does not, without more, disqualify him from prosecuting defendant for a different, subsequent crime.
We hasten to add, however, that a public defender owes his clients the same high standard of fidelity imposed by the Canons of Ethics on other members of the Bar. His duties in this respect are two-fold. 1 First, he may not act against his client in any case or matter in which he formerly represented him. 2 Second, he may at no time use against a former client any confidential information acquired by virtue of the previous attorney-client relationship. 3
Applying these principles here, the State Attorney can only be disqualified 4 if it were shown that as Public Defender he had actually gained confidential information from a prior attorney-client relationship with the defendant, which information would be useable in the new matter to defendant's prejudice. Such confidential information, however, must go beyond general information about defendant's personal characteristics tactically useable in any subsequent trial against him. Thus, contrary to defendant's assertions, general knowledge of defendant's 'traits, foibles, and the area of his strength, friendships and the like' will not disqualify the prosecutor. 5
3 See Canons 6 and 37 of the Canons...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thompson v. State
...violative of due process. As precedent, reliance was placed upon Young v. State, 177 So.2d 345 (2nd D.C.A.Fla.1965), and State v. Bryan, 227 So.2d 221 (Fla.App.1969). The State Attorney stated at the hearing that there had been no communication between Mr. Storey and the State Attorney or h......
-
State v. Fitzpatrick
...with the defendant, which information would be usable in the new matter to defendant's prejudice. Id. at 763 (quoting State v. Bryan, 227 So.2d 221, 223 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)). The Court The twofold prohibition enunciated in Bryan--that a former defender turned prosecutor can neither act direc......
-
State v. Laughlin, 53980
...the general rule and upon which its operation necessarily depends. A case with facts similar to those in this case is State v. Bryan, 227 So.2d 221 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1969). There the question presented for determination was whether a state attorney should be disqualified by the trial court o......
-
Surrette v. State
...denial of appellant's Rule 1.850 motion to set aside and vacate sentence is affirmed. HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur. 1 State v. Bryan, Fla.App.1969, 227 So.2d 221. ...