Crockett v. State

620 So. 2d 1306, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7623, 1993 WL 267379
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 21, 1993
DocketNo. 93-0215
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 620 So. 2d 1306 (Crockett 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
Crockett v. State, 620 So. 2d 1306, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7623, 1993 WL 267379 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court failed to make a sufficient inquiry concerning the apparent conflict of interest of appellant’s counsel in his representation of appellant as well as a prosecution witness. See DeArce v. State, 405 So.2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA1981).

DELL, C.J., and ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cadejuste v. State
993 So. 2d 122 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
620 So. 2d 1306, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7623, 1993 WL 267379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crockett-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.