Daniel Chavez v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Daniel Chavez v. State of Florida

190 So. 3d 255, 2016 WL 2609568, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6980

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 6, 2016

Docket1D14-5123

StatusPublished

This text of 190 So. 3d 255 (Daniel Chavez v. State of Florida) 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

Daniel Chavez v. State of Florida, 190 So. 3d 255, 2016 WL 2609568, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6980 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from the denial of his motion for .postconviction relief, appellant *256 asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by not appointing counsel to represent him at the evidentiary hearing on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We agree that the trial court should have appointed postconviction counsel in light of appellant’s lack of education, inability to speak English, history of mental illness, and inability to participate in the hearing in any meaningful way. See Williams v. State, 472 So.2d 738, 740 (Fla.1985) (holding that the trial court should have appointed postconviction counsel. where defendant had the equivalent of a second-grade education, was at best semiliterate, was totally unsophisticated about court procedures, and was unable to properly present his-case at the evidentiary hearing); Belizaire v. State, 765 So.2d 892, 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding that defendant was' entitled to have postconviction counsel appointed for the ’ evidentiary hearing where defendant had a third-grade education, was unable to read, lacked proficiency with the English language, and was unable to present his case properly without appointment of counsel); Johnson v. State, 711 So.2d 112, 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that defendant was entitled to the appointment of posir conviction counsel for the evidentiary hearing where defendant was unable to articulate his position and his lack of education and sophistication indicated that he was unable to meet the technical requirements'of going forward with the burden of proving his allegations); Rogers v. State, 702 So.2d 607, 608-09 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (holding that the trial court abused its discretion by not appointing postconviction counsel for defendant at the evidentiary hearing where defendant had only a ninth grade education, had no training in the law, and lacked the skills necessary to participate in the hearing).. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for -a new eviden-tiary hearing after counsel is appointed for appellant.

REVERSED and REMANDED;

RÁY, BILE REY, and JAY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from the denial of his motion for .postconviction relief, appellant *256 asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by not appointing counsel to represent him at the evidentiary hearing on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We agree that the trial court should have appointed postconviction counsel in light of appellant’s lack of education, inability to speak English, history of mental illness, and inability to participate in the hearing in any meaningful way. See Williams v. State, 472 So.2d 738, 740 (Fla.1985) (holding that the trial court should have appointed postconviction counsel. where defendant had the equivalent of a second-grade education, was at best semiliterate, was totally unsophisticated about court procedures, and was unable to properly present his-case at the evidentiary hearing); Belizaire v. State, 765 So.2d 892, 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding that defendant was' entitled to have postconviction counsel appointed for the ’ evidentiary hearing where defendant had a third-grade education, was unable to read, lacked proficiency with the English language, and was unable to present his case properly without appointment of counsel); Johnson v. State, 711 So.2d 112, 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that defendant was entitled to the appointment of posir conviction counsel for the evidentiary hearing where defendant was unable to articulate his position and his lack of education and sophistication indicated that he was unable to meet the technical requirements'of going forward with the burden of proving his allegations); Rogers v. State, 702 So.2d 607, 608-09 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (holding that the trial court abused its discretion by not appointing postconviction counsel for defendant at the evidentiary hearing where defendant had only a ninth grade education, had no training in the law, and lacked the skills necessary to participate in the hearing).. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for -a new eviden-tiary hearing after counsel is appointed for appellant.

REVERSED and REMANDED;

RÁY, BILE REY, and JAY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 So. 3d 255, 2016 WL 2609568, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-chavez-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack