Larry Lamar Koonce III v. State of Florida
4D2025-0147
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.Jun 4, 2025Background
- Larry Lamar Koonce III petitioned for a writ of certiorari after the circuit court appointed an expert to determine his competency to proceed in a criminal case.
- Koonce argued the expert was not listed on the Agency for Persons with Disabilities (APD)-maintained list of qualified evaluators for intellectual disability.
- The expert evaluated Koonce’s competency, reviewing materials such as law enforcement records, school records, psycho-educational evaluations, and detention medical records.
- The evaluation addressed the six legally mandated factors for competency under Florida law.
- The circuit court relied on this expert’s findings in ruling on Koonce’s competency to proceed.
- The appellate court addressed whether the appointment of a non-APD-listed expert violated statutory requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether section 916.301(1), Fla. Stat., requires courts to appoint only APD-listed experts for competency evaluations of alleged intellectual disability | Koonce: Only APD-listed experts qualify under the statute | State: Statute allows courts discretion to use APD list | Statute does not require APD list; expert qualified |
Key Cases Cited
- Laboratory Corporation of America v. Davis, 339 So. 3d 318 (Fla. 2022) (statutory interpretation requires considering the context and whole structure of the statute)
- Ham v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 308 So. 3d 942 (Fla. 2020) (emphasizing fair reading and contextual interpretation of statutes)
- Deal v. United States, 508 U.S. 129 (U.S. 1993) (the meaning of statutory terms must be derived from context)