Joseph Chester v. State of Florida, 213 So. 3d 1080

Chester lived briefly with a friend and the friend’s girlfriend; after being asked to move out, the girlfriend’s purse was later stolen and her back door was found open.
The girlfriend’s credit card was used; Chester admitted using the card, pleaded no contest to fraudulent use of a credit card, and went to trial on burglary of a dwelling and felony theft.
Chester’s defense at trial was that he found the card in his van and did not break into the house; credibility was central to the case.
During cross-examination the prosecutor asked whether Chester had given that explanation to police earlier—an improper comment implying he had asserted the theory for the first time rather than having invoked his right to remain silent.
The trial court sustained an immediate objection and instructed the jury to disregard the question; it denied Chester’s motion for mistrial.
Prior to trial the record reflected a competency evaluation had been conducted, but the court never made an independent, on-the-record competency finding before proceeding to trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether mistrial was required after prosecutor’s comment about earlier silence	Chester: comment improperly commented on right to remain silent and prejudiced trial, requiring mistrial	State: objection sustained and curative instruction given; comment was isolated and not so prejudicial	Denied—trial court did not abuse discretion; objection and curative instruction sufficient
Whether court was required to hold/enter a competency finding after an evaluation	Chester: court had reasonable grounds to question competency and failed to make independent finding, requiring reversal/remand	State: counsel represented doctor found Chester competent; no formal order was entered but an evaluation occurred	Reversed and remanded for a retroactive competency determination; if competent, enter nunc pro tunc order; if not, defendant entitled to new trial when competent

Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2005) (standard of review for denial of mistrial)
Cole v. State, 701 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 1997) (mistrial warranted only to ensure fair trial)
Poole v. State, 997 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 2008) (isolated improper comments do not automatically vitiate trial)
Dessaure v. State, 891 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 2004) (prejudice standard for prosecutorial comments)
Rodriguez v. State, 753 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 2000) (erroneous comments on silence do not require automatic reversal)
Goodwin v. State, 751 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1999) (assessing prejudice of single improper remark given curative instruction)
Cotton v. State, 177 So. 3d 666 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (when reasonable grounds to question competency exist, court must hold hearing)
Monte v. State, 51 So. 3d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (same)
Zern v. State, 191 So. 3d 962 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (trial court must make independent competency finding; cannot simply accept stipulation)
Reynolds v. State, 177 So. 3d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (remand for retroactive competency determination)
Brooks v. State, 180 So. 3d 1094 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (same)