DANIEL STEWART, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
This case concerns a defendant convicted of breaking a fence who appealed the denial of his motion to vacate the judgment and sentence. He argued he was denied counsel at trial despite being indigent. The appellate court reversed the denial, finding the record did not show the defendant was advised of his right to counsel or offered appointed counsel.
The court held that the record did not demonstrate that the defendant was advised of his constitutional right to court-appointed counsel if insolvent, nor was counsel offered to him. Therefore, the question of a competent and intelligent waiver of counsel did not arise.
“This record shows that the court neither advised this defendant of his constitutional right to court-appointed counsel if he was insolvent, nor offered to appoint counsel for him.”
Establishes the factual basis for the court's finding of a denial of counsel.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDaniel Stewart was convicted of breaking a fence after pleading not guilty and being found guilty by a jury. He was sentenced to state prison. Stewart…
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 Judgment And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Daniel Stewart was charged with breaking a fence. He entered a plea of not guilty, was tried, found guilty by a jury, adjudged guilty and sentenced to a term in the state prison. He filed a motion, pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule # 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence, alleging that he was tried, convicted and sentenced without benefit of counsel at a time when he was indigent and unable to afford counsel. From an order denying relief without a hearing, he appeals.
This record shows that the court neither advised this defendant of his constitutional right to court-appointed counsel if he was insolvent, nor offered to appoint counsel for him. On a record such as this, the question as to whether or not there was a competent and intelligent waiver of the defendant’s right to counsel does not exist. An examination of the motion and the files and records of the case does not *528conclusively show that this prisoner is entitled to no relief. The order denying relief is reversed with directions for further proceedings in accordance with the directions given in King v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 157 So.2d 440, a decision which we note was rendered subsequent to the action of the lower court herein.
SMITH, C. J., and ALLEN and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mason v. State, 176 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1965)…counsel and the availability of a state-supplied lawyer, if he is unable to provide his own. King v. State, Fla.App., 157 So. 2d 440; Beadles v. State, Fla.App., 162 So. 2d 4; Sams v. [*80] State, Fla.App., 163 So. 2d 10; Stewart v. State, Fla.App. 163 So. 2d 527; Phillips v. State, Fla.App. 164 So. 2d 858; Holmes v. State, Fla.App., 165 So. 2d 433; Archer v. State, Fla.App., 166 So. 2d 163; Carver v. State, Fla.App., 171 So. 2d 898. See also the opinion of the Third District Court of Appeal in Furman v. Sta…
-
Cleveland Williams v. State, 163 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)…h reference to whether or not the petitioner sufficiently alleged that he did not competently and intelligently waive his right to counsel we note the following quote from Stewart v. State, Case No. 4438 filed in this court on May 6, 1964, Fla.App., 163 So. 2d 527: “This record shows that the court neither advised this defendant of his constitutional right to court-appointed counsel if he was insolvent, nor offered to appoint counsel for him. On a record such as this, the question as to whether or not there…
Authorities Cited
- King v. State, 157 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)