Monroe v. State

225 So. 3d 329, 2017 WL 4270753
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 24, 2017
DocketCASE NO. 1D16-4672
StatusPublished

This text of 225 So. 3d 329 (Monroe 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
Monroe v. State, 225 So. 3d 329, 2017 WL 4270753 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As the issue raised in the instant petition has been considered and rejected by this Court in Andrews v. State, 218 So.3d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017), we deny the petition. However, as we did in Andrews, we certify the following question as one of great importance:

WHETHER AN INDIGENT DEFENDANT WHO IS REPRESENTED BY PRIVATE COUNSEL PRO BONO IS ENTITLED TO FILE MOTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPOINTMENT AND COSTS OF EXPERTS, MITIGATION ' SPECIALISTS, AND INVESTIGATORS EX PARTE AND UNDER SEAL, WITH SERVICE TO THE JUSTICE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION AND NOTICE TO THE STATE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND TO HAVE ANY HEARING ON SUCH MOTIONS EX PARTE, WITH ONLY THE DEFENDANT AND THE COMMISSION PRESENT.

PETITION DENIED.

LEWIS, ROBERTS, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.

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

Related

U'Dreka Andrews v. State of Florida
218 So. 3d 466 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 So. 3d 329, 2017 WL 4270753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monroe-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.