Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

641 So. 2d 466

Amaya v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 17, 1994

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-08-17

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 2009

6 state decisions

Relies on 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · Geders v. United States · Bova v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-08-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We reverse and remand for a new trial because of the trial court’s error in refusing appellant access to counsel during an overnight recess at trial. We reject appellant’s claims that the trial court erred in denying motions to dismiss and for directed verdict.

¶2The state concedes, and we agree, that the trial court erred in refusing appellant access to counsel. See Geders v. United States, 425 U.S. 80, 96 S.Ct. 1330, 47 L.Ed.2d 592 (1976); Bova v. State, 410 So.2d 1343 (Fla.1982). Further, we are unable to determine that the error was harmless under the strict test set out in State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986).

ANSTEAD, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
/641/so2d/466 · .json · Public domain