JASON WILLIAM ATTRIDE
v.
DIANE K. DAVISON, ESQUIRE
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 petition for writ of mandamus to compel court-appointed counsel to provide copies of appellate records should be denied without prejudice when factual disputes exist regarding the format in which counsel received the records and whether the clerk of court has an obligation to provide a separate paper copy to counsel representing an indigent, incarcerated defendant.
[1] An indigent defendant in a criminal case is entitled to copies of materials prepared at public expense that are in the possession of his former court-appointed counsel.
[2] When a petition for writ of mandamus to compel counsel to provide appellate records raises factual disputes regarding the format in which counsel received the records, th…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“An indigent defendant in a criminal case is entitled to copies of depositions and transcripts, or any other materials in his former attorney's possession that were prepared at public expense.”
Establishes the general entitlement of indigent defendants to materials prepared at public expense.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJason William Attride, an indigent defendant, appealed his criminal conviction following a negotiated plea. After his direct appeal was dismissed for …
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 Indigent Defendants 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
JASON WILLIAM ATTRIDE,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5D19-2614
DIANE K. DAVISON, ESQUIRE,
Respondent.
________________________________/
Opinion filed February 28, 2020
Petition for Writ of Mandamus, A Case of Original Jurisdiction.
Jason William Attride, Mayo, pro se.
Diane K. Davison, of Diane K. Davison, Law Office, P.L., Jacksonville, for Respondent.
LAMBERT, J.
Jason William Attride petitions this court for a writ of mandamus to compel his former court-appointed appellate counsel, Diane K. Davison,1 to provide him with a copy of the approximately 2600-page record from his criminal case that was prepared by the clerk of the circuit court and transmitted to Davison for Attride’s direct appeal. At first
Attride appealed his judgment and prison sentence that was imposed by the trial court following a negotiated plea. After Attride’s direct appeal was eventually dismissed by court order for lack of jurisdiction, Attride requested that Davison provide him with a copy of the records from his criminal case that were prepared by the clerk of the circuit court for the appeal. Unhappy with Davison’s response, Attride filed the present mandamus petition, later amended, asking that we issue a writ compelling Davison to provide him with a copy of these records.
We ordered Davison to respond to Attride’s amended petition, which she did. Davison raised no issue with Attride’s entitlement to a copy of the records. Her response was that she received the approximately 2600-page record from the clerk of the circuit court “in only PDF/CD form” and that she sent these records in the same PDF/CD format to Attride at the correctional facility where Attride was housed. Davison acknowledges
Attride was given leave by this court to reply to Davison’s response, which he did. Pertinent here, Attride challenged the truthfulness of Davison’s representations that the circuit court clerk only provided the appellate record to her in a PDF/CD format. Resultingly, Attride disputes that Davison has provided him with a copy of his records “in the same format it was received by Davison.”
We find that, for two reasons, the present dispute should initially be addressed in the trial court. First, by questioning whether Davison received the records of his criminal court proceedings for his appeal only in PDF/CD format, as opposed to also receiving a paper copy, Attride raises a factual dispute which, as an appellate court, we are not suited to resolve. See Dumas v. Marrero, 864 So. 2d 531, 532 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (“An appellate court is not an appropriate forum to consider the issues raised by this petition [seeking records from appointed counsel] because we do not conduct evidentiary or factfinding hearings.”). Thus, an evidentiary hearing is required to resolve whether Davison also received a paper copy of the appellate record.
Second, at this evidentiary hearing, if the trial court finds that Davison received the
2 Florida Administrative Code Rule 33-210.102(6)(b)1. precludes inmates in the Florida Department of Corrections from receiving “[n]on-paper items” in their legal mail.
Accordingly, we deny Attride’s amended petition for writ of mandamus, but we do so without prejudice to Attride seeking relief in the trial court.3
AMENDED PETITION DENIED, without prejudice. EDWARDS and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
3 Attride also expressed concern in the amended petition that his inability to obtain a paper copy of the requested records is impeding his ability to timely pursue postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. That issue is not directly before us, and is also better addressed by the postconviction court. See Petit- Frere v. State, 108 So. 3d 681, 683 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (“A postconviction court may, under rule 3.050, extend the two-year rule 3.850 deadline ‘for good cause shown.’” (quoting State v. Boyd, 846 So. 2d 458, 460 (Fla. 2003))).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mahlard K. Boyd, 846 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 2003)
- Dumas v. Marrero, 864 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- LaFLOWER v. State, 929 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Lewis v. State, 142 So. 3d 879 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Beloni Petit-Frere v. State, 108 So. 3d 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)