Donald O. Williams v. State
215 So. 3d 1248
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Donald Otis Williams was found to have violated probation after a violation hearing in which he initially declined appointed counsel.
- The trial court did not renew the offer of counsel before immediately proceeding to the sentencing portion of the hearing.
- Williams filed a petition under Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(d) alleging appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the trial court's failure to renew the offer of counsel for sentencing on appeal.
- The Fifth District reviewed whether appellate counsel’s omission was deficient and prejudicial to the appellate process.
- The court concluded the trial court’s failure to renew the offer of counsel at sentencing was fundamental error and that appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising the claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court’s failure to renew offer of counsel at sentencing was fundamental error and whether appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising it | Williams: Court failed to renew appointment offer before sentencing; appellate counsel should have raised this on appeal | State: (implicit) no reversible error or no prejudice from omission | The court held the failure to renew was fundamental error; appellate counsel was ineffective and relief granted — vacate sentence and remand for new sentencing with offer of counsel |
Key Cases Cited
- Pierce v. State, 121 So. 3d 1091 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (standard for assessing ineffective assistance of appellate counsel)
- Lopez v. State, 68 So. 3d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (same standard authority)
- Hays v. State, 63 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (trial court must renew offer of counsel at subsequent stages after waiver)
- Hardy v. State, 655 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (sentencing is a critical stage; waiver at earlier stage does not constitute knowing waiver for sentencing)
- Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2008) (failure to offer counsel at sentencing ordinarily constitutes fundamental error)
- Henretty v. State, 146 So. 3d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (appellate counsel ineffective for not raising failure-to-offer-counsel claim; ordered new appeal)
- Blane v. State, 987 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (same)
- Johnson v. Wainwright, 498 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 1986) (new appeal may be redundant when reversible error is acknowledged)
- Hampton v. State, 178 So. 3d 921 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (approving remand instructions in similar circumstances)
- Disinger v. State, 574 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (same)