Lewis v. State
2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 4496
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2014Background
- Appellant Tabitha Joy Lewis is serving a ten-year sentence and seeks the record on appeal; the Public Defender represents her.
- Santa Rosa County Clerk provided some paper items but delivered most of the appellate record electronically on a disk; Public Defender says local DOC bars inmates from receiving non-paper items and from accessing disk files.
- Public Defender contends the Clerk must provide a paper record for indigent defendants (including represented defendants at the end of representation and pro se defendants); the Clerk contends no rule requires providing a paper copy to represented defendants and that electronic delivery is permissible.
- The parties agree indigent defendants are entitled to a copy of the record (e.g., for Anders appeals) and that incarcerated defendants need paper to use the record.
- The court could find no definitive authority assigning the duty to produce paper records, so it adopted a practical rule: Clerks should continue to provide paper copies to appointed appellate counsel and to pro se indigent criminal defendants until a rule or statute provides otherwise.
- The court directed the Santa Rosa Clerk to standardly provide paper records to the Public Defender and certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether a clerk must provide a paper record on appeal to an indigent defendant; one judge concurred in part and dissented in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the clerk must provide a paper copy of the record on appeal to an indigent defendant | Clerk must prepare and furnish a paper record to indigent defendants (and to represented defendants at end of representation) | No legal authority requires the clerk to furnish a paper copy to a represented defendant; electronic delivery is acceptable | Court ordered Clerk to provide paper records to appointed counsel and pro se indigent defendants as standard practice and certified the legal question to the Florida Supreme Court |
| Whether electronic delivery by clerk satisfies obligations to indigent defendants | Paper is required because incarcerated defendants cannot access electronic media | Electronic delivery is permissible under current rules and definitions of court records | Court recognized access problems for incarcerated defendants and required paper copies despite lack of controlling authority favoring one format |
| Who bears the conversion cost to paper when record provided electronically | Clerk should provide paper to avoid duplicative public expense | Public Defender should not be forced to bear conversion cost; Clerk argues no statutory duty exists | Court adopted a practical allocation: Clerk bears duty to provide paper copies to appointed counsel and pro se indigent defendants to conserve public funds |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (permitted appointed counsel to file brief asserting appeal is frivolous)
- Baptiste v. Guffanti, 943 So.2d 303 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (indigent defendant entitled to copy of record in Anders appeals)
- Office of the Public Defender v. Madison, 961 So.2d 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (Public Defender must surrender trial transcripts prepared at public expense to defendant upon request)
- Bush v. State, 947 So.2d 685 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (Public Defender may be compelled to turn over records and transcripts prepared for client at public expense)