WELLS V. OFFICE OF P.D.

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, 2005 DAVID JAMES WELLS, Appellant, vs. ** ** ** THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER, etc., et al., CASE NO. 3D04-2888 ** ** Appellees. ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 83-15080 & 04-28694 Opinion filed July 27, 2005. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, David H. Young, Judge. David James Wells, in proper person. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees. Before GREEN, WELLS, and ROTHENBERG, JJ. ROTHENBERG, Judge. David James Wells appeals the denial of his petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to compel Alvin E. Entin, who acted as his specially appointed public defender in 1985, to provide Wells with his trial transcripts and appellate records. We affirm. Wells relies on Bermed v. Tacher, 565 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) and Dennis v. Brummer, 479 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). In those cases, the petition sought to compel either a public defender or a special assistant public defender to produce documents and transcripts relating to the petitioner s case. In both cases, there appeared to be no impediment to granting the relief sought, and we granted the petition for writ of mandamus. impediment to In the granting instant the case, relief however, there is an sought. Specifically, specially appointed public defender Entin does not recall Mr. Wells or his case and does not have his file in storage, noting that this is a twenty-year old case. nothing to provide to Wells. Therefore, Mr. Entin has He complied with Wells request for the files as best he could by informing him of the fact that he does not have the files. Because Mr. Entin cannot provide that which he does not have, the order denying the petition for writ of mandamus is affirmed. Affirmed. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.