T. McD. v. State
This text of 607 So. 2d 513 (T. McD. 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.
Opinion
T. McD., a Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and John S. Lynch, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corces, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The appellant correctly contends that her constitutional rights were violated when the trial judge adjudicated the appellant guilty without first permitting her defense counsel to present a closing argument. M.E.F. v. State, 595 So.2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). In this case, not only did the trial judge not permit closing argument, he *514 the trial during the course of the state's cross examination of the appellant, a clear violation of the appellant's trial rights guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new adjudicatory hearing.
LEHAN, C.J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
607 So. 2d 513, 1992 WL 332644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/t-mcd-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.