Coney v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Coney v. State

82 So. 3d 1019, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12950, 2011 WL 3586200

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 17, 2011

Docket4D10-1958

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 82 So. 3d 1019 (Coney 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.

Bluebook

Coney v. State, 82 So. 3d 1019, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12950, 2011 WL 3586200 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The issue presented in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in failing to hold a proper Faretta 1 inquiry prior to permitting appellant to represent himself at trial. We find that the trial court conducted an adequate Faretta inquiry prior to the commencement of trial and affirm appellant’s conviction. However, we must remand this case for resentencing, as the trial court did not renew the offer of assistance of counsel to appellant prior to sentencing. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.111(d)(5); Monte v. State, 51 So.3d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). We affirm appellant’s conviction in all other respects.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.

DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

1

. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The issue presented in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in failing to hold a proper Faretta 1 inquiry prior to permitting appellant to represent himself at trial. We find that the trial court conducted an adequate Faretta inquiry prior to the commencement of trial and affirm appellant’s conviction. However, we must remand this case for resentencing, as the trial court did not renew the offer of assistance of counsel to appellant prior to sentencing. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.111(d)(5); Monte v. State, 51 So.3d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). We affirm appellant’s conviction in all other respects.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.

DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

1

. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 So. 3d 1019, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12950, 2011 WL 3586200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coney-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack