THOMAS v. STATE (2003)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.

Thomas J. THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D02-1523.

Decided: May 29, 2003

Appellant, pro se. Charlie Crist, Attorney General and Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Appellant, Thomas J. Thomas, appeals the denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion following an evidentiary hearing. Appellant filed a timely and facially sufficient motion for appointment of counsel several weeks before the hearing, but it was denied. We reverse.

We repeat that counsel need not be appointed every time there is an evidentiary hearing, but “any doubt about the need for counsel must be resolved in favor of the indigent defendant.” Williams v. State, 472 So.2d 738, 740 (Fla.1985). In this case, we find that the number and complexity of the issues covered at the evidentiary hearing required the appointment of counsel and that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion. See Id.; Wheeler v. State, 807 So.2d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND with instructions to appoint counsel and conduct a new hearing.

PER CURIAM.

WEBSTER, PADOVANO, and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network