From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 29, 2003
846 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

Opinion

Case No. 1D02-1523.

Opinion filed May 29, 2003.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County. Don T. Sirmons, Judge.

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.

WEBSTER, PADOVANO, and HAWKES, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Thomas v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 29, 2003
846 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
Case details for

Thomas v. State

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS J. THOMAS, Appellant v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 29, 2003

Citations

846 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

Citing Cases

Thomas v. McNeil

Petitioner appealed, and the appellate court reversed, holding that the Rule 3.850 court erred in denying…

Simmons v. State

Decisions denying postconviction counsel are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See Thomas v. State, 846…