Legal Opinion

Meyers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 21, 2011No. 4D10-3404Published

1Per curiam

Appellant challenges his sentence for felony criminal mischief. At his resentenc-ing hearing, appellant informed the trial court that he desired to represent himself. We find that the trial court erred by not adequately inquiring into appellant’s knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to counsel under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).

“A defendant cannot make an intelligent, knowing waiver of his right to counsel without being informed of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation.” Vega v. State, 57 So.3d 259, 262 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011); see…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Vega v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API