Prieto v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Prieto v. State

564 So. 2d 293, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5858, 1990 WL 111964

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Prieto v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 573 So. 2d 398 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 7, 1990·No. No. 88-2160·Published

Opinion

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the State’s confession of error and our own independent review of the record, the convictions and sentences in this case must be reversed in view of the trial court’s failure to appoint a second expert to determine the defendant’s competency to stand trial and the failure to conduct a competency hearing.

We do not address appellant’s request regarding a recusal of the trial judge in view of the fact that this issue was never raised by the defendant in the trial court.

Reversed and remanded.

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

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the State’s confession of error and our own independent review of the record, the convictions and sentences in this case must be reversed in view of the trial court’s failure to appoint a second expert to determine the defendant’s competency to stand trial and the failure to conduct a competency hearing.

We do not address appellant’s request regarding a recusal of the trial judge in view of the fact that this issue was never raised by the defendant in the trial court.

Reversed and remanded.

Prieto v. State, 564 So. 2d 293, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5858, 1990 WL 111964 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

564 So. 2d 293 (Prieto v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.