Neal v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Joseph Neal appeals his convictions for armed robbery with a firearm, aggravated assault with a firearm, and shooting at or into an occupied vehicle. Because the trial court failed to apply the correct legal standard in evaluating and denying Mr. Neal’s request to proceed without counsel, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
A person who is accused of a crime has a constitutional right to represent himself or herself. See Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 807, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); Pasha v. State, 39 So.3d 1259, 1261 (Fla.2010). The accused need have no legal experience…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Dusky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- McKaskle v. WigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Anthony Williams v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
- Losada v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
- Ryan Erick Cheney v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
- David Antonio Williams v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
- Taylor v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.