Wharen v. State, 5D14–4359.

• Decision Date: 31 July 2015
• Docket Number: No. 5D14–4359.,5D14–4359.
• Parties: Patrick W. WHAREN, Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

170 So.3d 942

Patrick W. WHAREN, Sr., Appellant

v.STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D14–4359.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 31, 2015.

Patrick W. Wharen, Sr., Jasper, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ann M. Phillips, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

Opinion

EDWARDS, J.

Patrick W. Wharen, Sr. (“Appellant”), appeals the denial of his petition for writ of mandamus in which he sought free copies of discovery materials prepared at public expense from the Public Defender for the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit (“Appellee”). Transcripts and record documents prepared at public expense on behalf of an indigent defendant must be provided to him without charge. Accordingly, we reverse with directions to the trial court to require Appellee to respond to the petition and to identify which of the requested discovery materials were prepared or obtained at public expense that have not already been provided to Appellant. Then, the trial court must determine which documents must be provided to Appellant without charge.

Appellee represented Appellant in his murder trial. After his direct appeal was affirmed, Appellant made repeated, written requests to Appellee to copy and send him, free of charge, all discovery material from his trial. Appellant wrote that he had obtained some documents during his direct appeal, but he provided Appellee with a detailed list of the documents he desired for seeking postconviction relief. The documents requested included, inter alia, deposition and hearing transcripts, arrest warrant, notices of depositions, and discovery responses. Appellee agreed to provide approximately three hundred pages of documents, but only in return for payment of sixty dollars in advance for copying and shipping. Appellant attached numerous letters to his petition for a writ of mandamus seeking compliance with his request. The letters were between him and both the Appellee and the State Attorney's office, requesting free copies of documents prepared at public expense from both, with the same response from both: Appellant must pay in advance $.15 for each copy. Appellant pursued mandamus against the Appellee, but not as to the State Attorney.

“Mandamus is a common law remedy used to enforce an established legal right by compelling a person in an official capacity to perform an indisputable ministerial duty required by law.” Poole v. City of Port Orange, 33 So.3d 739, 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). “Because a public defender or court-appointed lawyer is an ‘official,’ mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel such an official to provide a defendant with copies of legal documents prepared at public expense.” Brown v. State, 93 So.3d 1194, 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Transcripts and record documents that were prepared at public expense on behalf of an indigent defendant must be provided to him without charge for copying.

Rosado v. State, 1 So.3d 1147, 1148 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). However, a defendant is not entitled to free copies of the entire file. Potts v. State, 869 So.2d 1223, 1225 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Aside from transcripts and other record documents prepared on behalf of the defendant at public expense, the defendant's attorney cannot be required to provide other documents in the case file without adequate compensation. Sanford v. Black, 782 So.2d 548, 549 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).

Appellant's petition for writ of mandamus set forth a prima facie case for compelling Appellee to provide him with those requested documents that exist and that were prepared or obtained at public expense. When a...