Shakes v. State
185 So. 3d 679
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Defendant Odane Shakes was adjudicated incompetent on Nov. 14, 2013 and committed to DCF.
- A competency evaluation filed Feb. 18, 2014 reported the psychologist’s conclusion that Shakes was competent and recommended return to county jail for final determination.
- March 14 and April 15, 2014 docket entries reflect counsel’s statements that Shakes was at the jail and taking medication; no formal competency hearing was held and no expert testimony was taken on the record.
- On July 3, 2014 the trial court accepted Shakes’s open no-contest pleas to attempted aggravated battery on an officer and resisting with violence, finding him orally "competent, coherent and alert," but did not enter a signed written competency order.
- Shakes was sentenced to concurrent ten- and five-year prison terms and appealed, arguing the court failed to hold an adequate competency hearing and thus his plea is invalid.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court satisfied the rule 3.212 requirement to determine and find that a previously adjudicated incompetent defendant had been restored to competency before accepting a plea | Shakes: No proper competency hearing or independent judicial determination occurred; therefore he remained presumed incompetent and the plea is invalid | State: Trial court procedure (counsel representations and judge’s oral statements) sufficed; remand only to enter written order | The court reversed: the trial court failed to conduct the required competency hearing or make an independent oral/written finding; remand to permit withdrawal of plea and hold a proper competency hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Dougherty v. State, 149 So. 3d 672 (Fla. 2014) (trial court must independently determine competency and enter written finding)
- Jackson v. State, 880 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 2004) (presumption that a person adjudicated incompetent remains so until adjudicated competent)
- Roman v. State, 163 So. 3d 749 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (when parties notify court of restored competency, court must still hold hearing or decide based on written reports with agreement)
- Martinez v. State, 851 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (oral statements can constitute a finding only when the record otherwise supports that an actual competency determination was made)
- Ross v. State, 155 So. 3d 1259 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (where defendant was adjudicated incompetent and no renewed competency determination occurred before plea, issue is cognizable on direct appeal)
- Macaluso v. State, 12 So. 3d 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (trial court erred when it relied solely on counsel’s representation of restored competency without further hearing)