266 So. 3d 1187
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2019Background
- Defense counsel moved pretrial for a psychological exam, stating reasonable grounds to believe the defendant was incompetent; the trial court granted the motion and scheduled a competency hearing under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.210(b).
- On the scheduled hearing date the defendant remained in jail and was not transported; neither he nor his newly appointed attorney appeared.
- The prosecutor told the court defense counsel believed the hearing was set in error; the court agreed there was no error but did not conduct the competency hearing.
- No independent finding of competency was made before the case proceeded to trial; the defendant was convicted.
- On direct appeal appellate counsel raised conflict-of-interest issues but did not raise the trial court’s failure to hold the competency hearing; the conviction was affirmed.
- The defendant filed a habeas petition asserting appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the competency-hearing error on direct appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court’s failure to conduct a competency hearing after ordering an evaluation was fundamental error | The State: no waiver excused court from holding hearing; court erred by not conducting required independent competency determination | Petitioner: trial court ordered evaluation, so reasonable grounds existed and the court was required to conduct the hearing; appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising the error | The court held the failure to conduct the competency hearing was fundamental error and appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising it |
| Whether setting a hearing satisfies Rule 3.210(b) | The State: scheduling complied with procedure | Petitioner: mere scheduling is insufficient; the rule requires the court actually conduct the hearing | The court held setting a hearing alone is insufficient; the court must conduct the competency hearing |
| Whether defense or counsel could waive the court's independent competency determination | The State: suggested defense invited or waived the error | Petitioner: right to an independent competency determination is not waivable by counsel | The court held trial counsel cannot waive the court’s duty; the right is nonwaivable |
| Remedy for failure to hold competency hearing | The State: (implicit) affirmed conviction should stand | Petitioner: reversal and remand for retroactive competency determination or new trial | The court granted habeas relief and remanded for a retroactive competency determination or adjudication of current competency and a new trial if required |
Key Cases Cited
- Flaherty v. State, 221 So.3d 633 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (direct appeal where competency issue was not raised)
- Baker v. State, 221 So.3d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (competency issues on appeal)
- Silver v. State, 193 So.3d 991 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (trial court ordering evaluation indicates reasonable grounds and appellate counsel ineffective for failing to raise competency issue)
- Monte v. State, 51 So.3d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (once reasonable grounds are found court must conduct competency hearing)
- Deferrell v. State, 199 So.3d 1056 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (setting a hearing is insufficient; court must actually conduct it)
- Raithel v. State, 226 So.3d 1028 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (rejecting invited-error waiver of competency hearing)
- Sheheane v. State, 228 So.3d 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (court’s independent competency determination cannot be waived)
- Dortch v. State, 242 So.3d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (failure to conduct competency hearing is fundamental error requiring reversal)