From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dixon v. State

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA
Aug 16, 2018
250 So. 3d 872 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

Opinion

No. 1D17-3367

08-16-2018

Willie George DIXON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Justin Foster Karpf, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Steven Edward Woods, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Justin Foster Karpf, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Steven Edward Woods, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Willie George Dixon, Jr. raises three issues on appeal. The first, regarding the trial court's failure to conduct a proper competency determination, requires reversal—which the State concedes. The other two we find to be without merit. The remedy is a remand for the trial court to conduct a nunc pro tunc competency evaluation; if one cannot be done, Dixon must receive a new trial. See Brooks v. State , 180 So.3d 1094, 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

Makar, Winokur, and Winsor, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Dixon v. State

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA
Aug 16, 2018
250 So. 3d 872 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
Case details for

Dixon v. State

Case Details

Full title:WILLIE GEORGE DIXON, JR., Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Court:FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA

Date published: Aug 16, 2018

Citations

250 So. 3d 872 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)