Paden v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Paden v. State

22 So. 3d 149, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 17297, 2009 WL 3916862

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 20, 2009

Docket1D09-1722

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 22 So. 3d 149 (Paden 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

Paden v. State, 22 So. 3d 149, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 17297, 2009 WL 3916862 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Paden presents a timely claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. He faults his counsel for failing to argue that the trial court fundamentally erred when, after initially adjudicating him incompetent, it thereafter proceeded to trial without holding an appropriate hearing or making a determination that he had been restored to competency. The state forthrightly concedes the trial court’s error in this regard, and that its error is fundamental. See Jackson v. State, 880 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Accordingly, we grant Paden’s petition, vacate the August 31, 2008, judgment and sentence in Gadsden County Circuit Court case number 05-770CF, and remand for such further proceedings as may be warranted pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.212.

PETITION GRANTED, JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE VACATED, and REMANDED.

HAWKES, C.J., BARFIELD and CLARK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Paden presents a timely claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. He faults his counsel for failing to argue that the trial court fundamentally erred when, after initially adjudicating him incompetent, it thereafter proceeded to trial without holding an appropriate hearing or making a determination that he had been restored to competency. The state forthrightly concedes the trial court’s error in this regard, and that its error is fundamental. See Jackson v. State, 880 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Accordingly, we grant Paden’s petition, vacate the August 31, 2008, judgment and sentence in Gadsden County Circuit Court case number 05-770CF, and remand for such further proceedings as may be warranted pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.212.

PETITION GRANTED, JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE VACATED, and REMANDED.

HAWKES, C.J., BARFIELD and CLARK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 So. 3d 149, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 17297, 2009 WL 3916862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paden-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack