Melton v. State
56 So. 3d 868
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Melton appeals an order prohibiting his lawyer from appearing on his behalf and striking an unauthorized collateral relief motion.
- CCRC initially provided capital postconviction representation; after defunding, a private registry lawyer, D. Todd Doss, was appointed to continue the collateral attack at state expense.
- Doss filed a Rule 3.850 motion in an earlier case to pursue newly discovered innocence evidence related to another conviction.
- The State moved to prohibit registry counsel from representing in the non-capital 3.850 proceeding, citing section 27.711(11) and Kilgore, despite Doss offering to represent pro bono.
- Trial court held that registry counsel are prohibited from non-capital representation and that private counsel cannot proceed in a non-capital case, even pro bono.
- The court ultimately reversed, holding that private counsel acting pro bono publico may represent a capital defendant in non-capital collateral proceedings and that section 27.711(11) does not bar such representation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether section 27.711(11) applies to private pro bono counsel. | Melton argues section 27.711(11) only restricts registry counsel. | State argues the statute bars non-capital representation by registry counsel and private counsel under certain conditions. | No; section 27.711(11) does not prohibit pro bono private counsel from non-capital representation. |
| Whether the right to counsel supports representation by chosen counsel in civil/postconviction matters. | Melton should be allowed to keep chosen counsel for postconviction work. | State-supplied limits on counsel in collateral proceedings restrict the right. | Right to counsel of choice extends to postconviction proceedings; cannot be unconstitutionally curtailed. |
| Whether the trial court properly restricted Doss from filing the non-capital 3.850 motion. | Doss volunteered to represent pro bono and should be allowed. | State relied on statutory restrictions against non-capital representation by registry/private counsel. | Reversed; Doss may represent in non-capital collateral proceeding pro bono. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kilgore v. State, 976 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 2007) (held registry/private counsel limits in capital cases; obiter dicta on non-capital representation under Kilgore)
- Williams v. State, 472 So.2d 738 (Fla. 1985) (recognizes right to counsel in postconviction proceedings)
- Myers v. Siegel, 920 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (right to counsel in civil/postconviction matters)
- Brooks v. AMP Servs. Ltd., 979 So.2d 435 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (court’s discretion to deny pro hac vice; right to counsel of choice)
- Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (U.S. 1932) (due process right to counsel in hearings; general principle relevant to civil proceedings)
- Potashnick v. Port City Const. Co., 609 F.2d 1101 (5th Cir. 1980) (broad right to counsel in civil litigation)
- Stoletz v. State, 875 So.2d 572 (Fla. 2004) (specific vs general statute integration; in pari materia principle)
- Zold v. Zold, 911 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 2005) (statutes relating to same subject construed together)
- Fullerton v. Fla. Med. Ass’n, Inc., 938 So.2d 587 (Fla.1st DCA 2006) (common law vs statute; strict construction when conflict)
- Egan v. State, 287 So.2d 1 (Fla.1973) (common law incorporation in Florida privilege)