Boren v. State
This text of 262 So. 3d 243 (Boren v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In this single-issue appeal, Pamela Boren contends the trial court fundamentally erred by failing to hold a competency hearing or enter a written order of competency despite having reasonable grounds to believe she was incompetent to stand trial. The State properly concedes error.
Prior to trial, defense counsel moved for a competency evaluation under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.210(b). As grounds for counsel's belief that Boren was not mentally competent to proceed, counsel alleged that Boren did not seem to *244"understand the roles of defense counsel, prosecutor, jury, and judge," had trouble communicating with counsel, and appeared unlikely to conduct herself appropriately at trial. Counsel also alleged that Boren reported she had been diagnosed as bipolar and was experiencing hallucinations. The trial court granted the motion and appointed an expert to examine Boren. The record is silent on what happened next regarding Boren's competency. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury found Boren guilty of the charged offenses.
Once a court "has reasonable grounds to question the defendant's competency, the court has no choice but to conduct a hearing to resolve the question." Zern v. State ,
Here, nothing in the record shows that a hearing was held or that the trial court ruled on Boren's competency. We therefore remand for a retroactive determination, if possible. Zern ,
REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.
Roberts and Winsor, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
262 So. 3d 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boren-v-state-fladistctapp-2018.