ERIC DAMONT DAVIS
v.
STATE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A trial court may determine a defendant's competency based on written reports alone, but must enter a separate written order to satisfy Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure requirements; signed court minutes do not constitute a valid order.
[1] A trial court may decide the issue of a defendant's competency to proceed based on written reports alone.
[2] A trial court must enter a written order when a defendant is found competent to proceed.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Because the signed court minutes form was not an order within the definition of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, the act of filing it with the court clerk did not amount to the rendition of an order.”
State v. Wagner citation regarding formal requirements for orders
Eric Damont Davis was convicted by jury of aggravated battery with a firearm. The trial court made a competency determination reflected only in court …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appeal From Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED ERIC DAMONT DAVIS, Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D17-165 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed March 2, 2018 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Marc L. Lubet, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Glendon George Gordon, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Eric Damont Davis appeals the judgment and sentence entered against him after he was convicted by a jury of aggravated battery with a firearm. He argues the trial court erred by a) conducting an insufficient competency hearing; b) failing to make an independent competency determination; and c) failing to enter a written order on competency. We disagree with Davis' assertion that the trial court conducted an insufficient hearing and failed to make an independent determination of his competency.
See Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672, 679 (Fla. 2014) (finding trial court may decide issue of competency based on written reports alone but must enter written order if defendant is found competent to proceed). Nevertheless, because the court minutes signed by the trial judge reflecting this determination do not constitute an order, we remand for entry of a written order finding Davis competent to proceed. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(f) (defining order as "[a] decision, order, judgment, decree, or rule of a lower tribunal, excluding minutes and minute book entries"); see also State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224, 1229 (Fla. 2004) ("Because the signed court minutes form was not an order within the definition of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, the act of filing it with the court clerk did not amount to the rendition of an order."); Carroll v. State, 157 So. 3d 385,
385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ("Even when the trial court has previously made a written finding of competency on a signed 'minutes' form, this still does not satisfy the requirement to enter an order as set forth by the rules of criminal procedure."). In all other respects, we affirm.
AFFIRMED in part; REMANDED with instructions. BERGER, EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hill v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2026)…ce. Allstate Ins. v. Kaklamanos, 843 So. 2d 885, 889 (Fla. 2003). I. Competency to Proceed at a Material Stage of a Criminal Proceeding The State may not proceed against a criminal defendant who has been deemed incompetent. See Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672, 676 (Fla. 2014) ("[I]t is well-settled that a criminal prosecution may not move forward at any material stage of a criminal proceeding against a defendant who is incompetent to proceed." (quoting McCray v. State, 71 So. 3d 848, 862 (Fla. 2011))).…
Authorities Cited
- Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672 (Fla. 2014)
- State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2004)
- Connell L. Carroll v. State, 157 So. 3d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)