Legal Opinion

Cravelyn Hooker v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 10, 2014No. 4D13-1044PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGross, J.

The circuit court denied a defendant’s unequivocal request to represent himself because he was not “qualified” to do so by his “training, education, and experience.” This ruling violated the defendant’s right to self-representation under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand for a new trial.

Cravelyn Hooker was charged with a form of sexual battery contrary to section 794.011(8)(b), Florida Statutes (2010). After a jury trial, he was convicted of the lesser included offense of lewd or lascivious battery.

Severa…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Nelson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
  4. McCray v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2011
  5. Tennis v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2008

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Losada v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  2. Loor v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  3. ERSKINE MCKINLEY v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
  4. Luke Petruschke v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
  5. Dominic M. Bland v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API