Coates v. McWilliams
Opinion
By original proceeding of mandamus, petitioner seeks to require his special assistant public defenders to provide copies of relevant documents relating to his conviction which has been affirmed on direct appeal. See Coates v. State, 638 So.2d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). It is apparent from the attachments to the petition that the documents sought have not been furnished because no funds are provided to reimburse the special assistant public defender for the cost of duplicat-. ing and forwarding same to petitioner. It is also noted that the original documents cannot be forwarded to petitioner because a special assistant public defender is required by In [696]*696Re: Special Assistant Public Defenders, Method of Appointment & Compensation, no. 92-1 Administrative Order no. 92-38 to maintain same for a period of three years from the closing of the case.1
We decline to issue a rule to show cause. By accepting an appointment as special assistant public defender, counsel does not become obligated to bear the cost of furnishing documents to an indigent defendant, even though a duly constituted public defender’s office, which is properly funded for such cost items, may be so required. See Dennis v. Brummer, 479 So.2d 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
650 So. 2d 695 (Coates v. McWilliams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.