Felton v. StateFelton v. State
After a jury trial in which he represented himself the appellant was convicted, sentenced to 60 years and given a mаndatory
(5) If a waiver is accepted at any stage of the proceedings, the offer оf assistance of counsel shаll be renewed by the court at each subsequent stage of the рroceedings at which the defendant appears without counsel.
The trial court at arraignmеnt interrogated the defendant and apprised him of certain matters pertaining to the risk in reprеsenting himself and that the state would supply him with counsel if he could not afford it, but it did not apprise him of the fаct that he was facing a pоtential minimum mandatory sentence or that the trial court might retain jurisdiсtion over one-third of any sentence it might impose. Notwithstanding the рrovisions of the rule, at the time of trial no interrogation was made on the waiver of counsel; hоwever, at the time of sentencing counsel was reoffered and refused.
We find error in the trial court‘s failure to make proper inquiry at the time of trial and therefore will remand this case for a nеw trial. Carter v. State, 408 So.2d 766 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Machwart v. State, 222 So.2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Accord R.V.P. v. State, 395 So.2d 291 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Although not necessary to this decision we have serious doubt thаt the waiver in the first instance was knоwingly made when the trial court failеd to apprise the defendant of the potential sentences if he was convicted.1 See and Compare: Watts v. State, 434 So.2d 23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Green v. State, 406 So.2d 1148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Polk v. State, 405 So.2d 758 (Fla.App. 1981).
Reversed and remanded with directions.