BAPTISTE V. GUFFANTI

 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, A.D. 2006 RILLIO BAPTISTE, ** Petitioner, vs. ** ** ALBERT W. GUFFANTI, P.A., Respondent. CASE NO. 3D04-176 ** ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 99-34693 ** Opinion filed December 6, 2006. A Case of Original Jurisdiction Mandamus. Rillio Baptiste, in proper person. Albert W. Guffanti, in proper person. Richard L. Polin, Bureau Chief, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, for The State of Florida. John Eddy Morrison, Assistant Public Defender, Office of the Public Defender, as Amicus Curiae. Before COPE, C.J., and FLETCHER and WELLS, JJ. ON MOTION FOR REHEARING COPE, C.J. On consideration of the petitioner s motion for rehearing we withdraw the court s previous opinion filed March 10, 2004, and substitute the following opinion. Rillio Baptiste seeks a writ of mandamus compelling Albert W. Guffanti, specially appointed public defender ( SAPD ), to provide him with a copy of the complete record in Baptiste s plenary appeal, at no cost to Baptiste. We grant the petition. The dispositive fact here is that Baptiste s appeal of his judgment and sentence was accomplished in a proceeding under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). As explained in this opinion, since this appeal was an Anders proceeding, Baptiste should have been appeal without provided charge. a complete That being copy so, of his the record request for on a complete copy of the record on appeal is well taken. Baptiste was convicted of criminal offenses in 2002 and he appealed. After reviewing the record on appeal, the SAPD filed an Anders brief and motion to withdraw, stating that after a careful examination of the record on appeal, the SAPD could find no error which could be conscientiously argued as a predicate for relief. On receiving the Anders brief and motion to withdraw, this court issued what was at that time its standard order in such cases. The court s order directed that the memorandum brief be 2 furnished to Baptiste, and allow Baptiste thirty days in which to file a statement of points in support of the appeal. The SAPD supplied a copy of the Anders memorandum brief to Baptiste. require However, the SAPD this to court s send order Baptiste a appeal, and the SAPD did not do so. did copy not of specifically the record on Baptiste did not submit a statement of points in support of the appeal. After the time for doing so expired, this court issued an affirmance without Baptiste v. State, 846 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) opinion. (table). Thereafter Baptiste filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to require the SAPD to provide him a complete copy of the record on appeal without charge. This court issued an opinion denying relief and Baptiste moved for rehearing. During the pendancy of proceedings, the Clerk of this court called to convictions proceeding. this the and attention sentences had the been fact affirmed that in Baptiste s an Anders The Clerk was aware that the public defender in district proceedings. panel s has a well-established procedure for Anders Under that procedure, the public defender sends the defendant a copy of the Anders brief when it is filed, and the record on appeal 1 when this court enters its standard Anders 1 For purposes of this includes transcripts. opinion 3 the term record on appeal order allowing the defendant to file a statement of points in support of the appeal. The logic is that the defendant needs the record in order to submit a statement of points to this court. See Gardner v. California, 393 U.S. 367, 370 (1969); Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 742-43 (1967); Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 18 (1956); Byrd v. Wainwright, 722 F.2d 716, 718 (11th Cir. 1984); State v. LaPlanche, 507 S.E.2d 34, 3536 (N.C. 1998); State v. Clark, 2 P.3d 89, 99 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999). Further, providing a copy of the record to the client also appears to be the current practice among SAPDs when moving to withdraw under Anders. As a result of this case, the court standard order for Anders proceedings. has revised its The revised order now specifies that in Anders proceedings, the attorney who has moved to withdraw must supply the defendant with a copy of the complete record on appeal in addition to the Anders brief. 2 Because Baptiste should have already been given a copy of the record on appeal without charge, his petition for writ of mandamus is well taken. The SAPD shall do so. Further, the SAPD has disclosed that he followed the same practice in two other cases. Accordingly, he shall forward copies of the record 2 The SAPD is entitled to reimbursement for the expenses of copying and mailing, as these expenses are incurred in the course of the appointed representation. 4 on appeal in those cases to the respective defendants, along with a copy of this opinion. This court asked the parties to address whether the failure of the SAPD to send a copy of the record on appeal to the defendant constituted grounds for reopening the appeal from the judgment and sentence. The SAPD, and the public defender as amicus curiae, 3 argue that the appeals should be reopened. The State argues that this should not be done. On consideration, the only matter actually pending before this court at this time is Baptiste s petition for writ of mandamus in which he seeks a copy of the record on appeal in his case. That being so, we decline to reach at this time the question whether any of the underlying appeals should be reopened. We grant the petition but withhold formal issuance of the writ, being certain that the SAPD will comply with this opinion. 3 This court requested that the public defender file a brief as amicus curiae, and expresses its appreciation for its memorandum addressing the issues raised in this proceeding. 5

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.