Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 04-03-2020

Case Style:

MICHAEL SUTTON vs STATE OF FLORIDA

Case Number: 17-4073

Judge: Darryl C. Casanueva.

Court: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

Plaintiff's Attorney: Ashley Moody, Attorney General,
Tallahassee, and Brandon R. Christian,
Assistant Attorney General, Tampa; and
Bilal Ahmed Faruqui, Assistant Attorney
Genera

Defendant's Attorney:


Need help finding a lawyer for representation for appealing judgments and sentences for attempted second-degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon following his
nolo contendere plea to the charges in Florida?

Call 918-582-6422. It's Free.



Description:

MoreLaw Receptionists
VOIP Phone and Virtual Receptionist Services
Call 918-582-6422 Today


Michael C. Sutton appeals his judgments and sentences for attempted
second-degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon following his
nolo contendere plea to the charges. Mr. Sutton argues, and the State correctly
- 2 -
concedes, that the trial court erred by failing to conduct a competency hearing and by
failing to enter a competency order before he entered a plea to the offenses.
In a previous order, this court relinquished jurisdiction to the trial court to
conduct a competency hearing to determine, if possible, whether Mr. Sutton was
competent at the time of the plea hearing as there were two psychological evaluations
performed before he entered the plea. See Carrion v. State, 235 So. 3d 1051, 1054
(Fla. 2d DCA 2018); Moulton v. State, 230 So. 3d 934 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). This court
directed that if the trial court found that Mr. Sutton was incompetent at the time of the
plea hearing or if the court could not make a retroactive determination, the trial court
must allow Mr. Sutton to withdraw his plea, so long as Mr. Sutton is competent to do so.
After conducting a competency hearing, the trial court entered an order
finding that it is incapable of determining whether Mr. Sutton was competent at the time
he entered his plea. We therefore reverse the judgments and sentences and remand
this matter for the trial court to allow Mr. Sutton to withdraw his plea, so long as Mr.
Sutton is presently competent. See Carrion, 235 So. 3d at 1054 (holding that if trial
court could not make a retroactive determination that appellant was competent at the
time of the plea or if it found that appellant was incompetent at the time of the plea,
the trial court should allow the appellant to withdraw his plea if he is presently
competent). We caution Mr. Sutton that, should he withdraw his plea, the State can
proceed against him on the original charges

Outcome: Reversed and remanded

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: