Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MOSES TOUSSAINT, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM.

Moses Toussaint challenges his conviction for armed robbery, arguing that the trial court erred in allowing appellant to represent himself at trial without conducting an adequate Faretta inquiry into his waiver of counsel. Under Faretta and its progeny, the trial court is required to make an inquiry on the record which should include evidence of the defendant's age, mental status, education, and experience; the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, including the nature and complexity of the case, the seriousness of the charges, the potential sentence and any enhancement; and any other factor particularly relevant to the case presented. Burton v. State, 596 So.2d 1184, 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Rule 3.111 (d), Fla.R.Crim.P.; see also, Jones v. State, 658 So.2d 122, 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (J. Altenbernd, concurring). Because the trial court here failed to adequately inquire on the record concerning Toussaint's mental condition, age, education, past history, or ability prior to letting him represent himself at trial, in accordance with Burton we are constrained to reverse and remand for a new trial.

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).

MINER, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

TOUSSAINT v. STATE
(Dec 19, 1995)