Bowman v. State

This is the first of two appeals in which appellant raises three identical points. See case No. 88-2836. We affirm the trial court’s determination to allow appellant to act as his own attorney, as it conducted an appropriate inquiry under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); see also Jones v. State, 449 So.2d 253 (Fla.1984); Smith v. State, 407 So.2d 894 (Fla.1982). Likewise, the trial court did not err in failing to conduct a competency hearing, and we affirm this point. Rivers v. State, 458 So.2d 762 (Fla.1984). However, we' reverse appellant’s sentence…