State of Florida v. Craig Edward Leeks

Dade City, Florida, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with second-degree murder and improper exhibition of a firearm.

The State charged Leeks with attempted first-degree murder and
aggravated assault. His defense counsel moved to have him evaluated
for competency, and the trial court granted the motion. The
psychological evaluation concluded Leeks was competent to stand trial.
After several months and a change in defense counsel, Leeks' case
proceeded to trial. Before jury selection, the trial court, noting that the
issue of Leeks' competency had been raised previously, asked Leeks' new
attorneys whether they had any concerns about Leeks' competency.
They had none. The court asked Leeks whether he understood the
charges and the possible penalties, and Leeks said he did. The court
noted Leeks was alert and showed no signs of impairment. Based on its
observations of Leeks' courtroom behavior and the statements of counsel,
the court announced Leeks was competent to proceed.

* * *

The test to determine competency is "whether the defendant has
sufficient present ability to consult with counsel with a reasonable degree
of rational understanding and whether the defendant has a rational, as
well as factual, understanding of the pending proceedings." Fla. R. Crim.
P. 3.211(a)(1); see also Damas v. State, 423 So. 3d 811, 819 (Fla. 2025).
Factors used to find competency include whether the defendant
appreciates the charges against him, the possible penalties that may be
3
imposed, the adversary nature of the legal process, and whether the
defendant is able to disclose relevant facts to counsel, testify relevantly,
and demonstrate appropriate courtroom behavior. See Fla. R. Crim. P.
3.211(a)(2)(A)(i)-(vi). The trial court was satisfied that Leeks met these
requirements and orally stated its findings. The court did not, however,
enter a written order as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure
3.212(b) ("If the court finds the defendant competent to proceed, the
court must enter its order so finding and proceed.")

The Defendant was found guilty.

Affirmed