Jervis v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jervis v. State

455 So. 2d 1320, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 1998, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15094

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 18, 1984

DocketNo. 83-1415

StatusPublished

This text of 455 So. 2d 1320 (Jervis 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

Jervis v. State, 455 So. 2d 1320, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 1998, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15094 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

BASKIN, Judge.

Defendant Donald Jervis represented himself in a non-jury trial. He was convicted of unlawful possession of a short-barreled rifle and received a sentence of 90 days in the Dade County Jail as a condition of a three-year term of probation. We reverse.

The record reflects that the trial court failed to conduct an adequate inquiry prior to accepting defendant Jervis’s waiver of counsel. Felton v. State, 438 So.2d 1049 (Fla.3d DCA 1983). As a result, we are unable to conclude that Jervis’s relinquishment of his right to counsel was knowing and intelligent. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). In addition, the record fails to disclose that his uncounseled waiver of jury trial was knowing and intelligent. Enrique v. State, 408 So.2d 635 (Fla.3d DCA 1981), review denied, 418 So.2d 1280 (Fla.1982).

Reversed and remanded.

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

BASKIN, Judge.

Defendant Donald Jervis represented himself in a non-jury trial. He was convicted of unlawful possession of a short-barreled rifle and received a sentence of 90 days in the Dade County Jail as a condition of a three-year term of probation. We reverse.

The record reflects that the trial court failed to conduct an adequate inquiry prior to accepting defendant Jervis’s waiver of counsel. Felton v. State, 438 So.2d 1049 (Fla.3d DCA 1983). As a result, we are unable to conclude that Jervis’s relinquishment of his right to counsel was knowing and intelligent. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). In addition, the record fails to disclose that his uncounseled waiver of jury trial was knowing and intelligent. Enrique v. State, 408 So.2d 635 (Fla.3d DCA 1981), review denied, 418 So.2d 1280 (Fla.1982).

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

455 So. 2d 1320, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 1998, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15094, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jervis-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack