WILLIAM SCHULTZ
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise on direct appeal the trial court's failure to conduct a competency hearing and enter an order adjudicating the defendant competent.
[1] Appellate counsel is ineffective when failing to raise on direct appeal a trial court's failure to conduct a competency hearing and enter a competency determination, whic…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court appointed an expert to evaluate Schultz but did not hold a competency hearing or enter an order adjudicating him competent. Schultz ra…
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 Retroactive Competency Determination 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
WILLIAM SCHULTZ,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5D20-1052
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
________________________________/
Opinion filed August 21, 2020
Petition for Alleging Ineffectiveness of Appellate Counsel, A Case of Original Jurisdiction.
Loren D. Rhoton, Tampa, for Petitioner.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
In his petition for writ of habeas corpus, Petitioner raises a single ground for relief, arguing that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the trial court’s failure to conduct a competency hearing and make a finding on competency. Although the trial court appointed an expert to evaluate Petitioner, it did not hold a competency hearing or enter an order adjudicating Petitioner competent. Therefore, we find appellate counsel ineffective for failing to address this issue in Petitioner's direct appeal. See Joseph v.
2 State, 244 So. 3d 416, 416–17 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). Accordingly, we grant the petition and remand this cause to the trial court to make a retroactive competency determination, if possible. See Silver v. State, 193 So. 3d 991, 993–94 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). If a retroactive determination cannot be properly made, or if the court determines Petitioner was incompetent at the time of trial, a new trial should be set once Petitioner’s competency is restored. See id. at 994.
PETITION GRANTED.
EVANDER, C.J., LAMBERT and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.