MARIE PETIT-LOUIS
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
MARIE PETIT-LOUIS
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2020)
Per_curiam
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Weaver v. State, 894 So. 2d 178, 187 (Fla. 2004) (“A court’s decision involving withdrawal or discharge of counsel is subject to review for abuse of discretion.”); Schardt v. State, 10 So. 3d 139, 140 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding a client’s right to discharge private counsel must be balanced “against the court’s interest in judicial administration and avoiding unreasonable delay when a defendant seeks to discharge counsel on the day of trial”) (quoting Jackson v. State, 979 So. 2d 442, 445 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)); Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A) (stating a nolo contendere plea with a legally dispositive issue that has not been specifically reserved for appeal may only be appealed on enumerated grounds).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Weaver v. State, 894 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 2004)
- Schardt v. State, 10 So. 3d 139 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)