Verner v. State

910 So. 2d 884, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 13387, 2005 WL 2043549
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 26, 2005·No. No. 5D05-2000·Published

Opinion

PALMER, J.

Eva Verner filed a pro se petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus. We dismiss Verner’s petition as being a nullity because she is presently being represented by counsel, and therefore, she is not authorized to proceed pro se.

The docket reflects that an order appointing a public defender was entered on May 25, 2005, and that a notice of appearance of attorney was entered on June 10, 2005. Although Verner alleges that the trial court “reluctantly” allowed her to represent herself, the record fails to support that allegation. Therefore, since Verner is represented by the public defender, her pro se petition filed on June 21, 2005 is a legal nullity. See Salser v. State, 582 So.2d 12 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), rev. dismissed, 613 So.2d 471 (Fla.1993).

PETITION DISMISSED.

PLEUS, C.J., and SHARP, W., J., concur.

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

Verner v. State, 910 So. 2d 884, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 13387, 2005 WL 2043549 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

910 So. 2d 884 (Verner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Salser v. State
613 So. 2d 471 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1993)
Salser v. State
582 So. 2d 12 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)