Daniel Chavez v. State of Florida , 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6980 ( 2016 )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
DANIEL CHAVEZ, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
v. CASE NO. 1D14-5123
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed May 6, 2016.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Wakulla County.
Charles W. Dodson, Judge.
Daniel Chavez, pro se, Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Thomas H. Duffy, Assistant Attorney
General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal from the denial of his motion for postconviction relief, appellant
asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by not appointing counsel to represent
him at the evidentiary hearing on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We
agree that the trial court should have appointed postconviction counsel in light of
appellant’s lack of education, inability to speak English, history of mental illness,
and inability to participate in the hearing in any meaningful way. See Williams v.
State, 472 So. 2d 738, 740 (Fla. 1985) (holding that the trial court should have
appointed postconviction counsel where defendant had the equivalent of a second-
grade education, was at best semiliterate, was totally unsophisticated about court
procedures, and was unable to properly present his case at the evidentiary
hearing); Belizaire v. State, 765 So. 2d 892, 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding that
defendant was entitled to have postconviction counsel appointed for the evidentiary
hearing where defendant had a third-grade education, was unable to read, lacked
proficiency with the English language, and was unable to present his case properly
without appointment of counsel); Johnson v. State, 711 So. 2d 112, 116 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1998) (holding that defendant was entitled to the appointment of
postconviction counsel for the evidentiary hearing where defendant was unable to
articulate his position and his lack of education and sophistication indicated that he
was unable to meet the technical requirements of going forward with the burden of
proving his allegations); Rogers v. State, 702 So. 2d 607, 608-09 (Fla. 1st DCA
1997) (holding that the trial court abused its discretion by not appointing
postconviction counsel for defendant at the evidentiary hearing where defendant had
only a ninth grade education, had no training in the law, and lacked the skills
2
necessary to participate in the hearing). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a
new evidentiary hearing after counsel is appointed for appellant.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
RAY, BILBREY, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.
3