Opinion

Brown v. State

  • 559 So. 2d 717
  • 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2537
  • 1990 WL 43142
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
Apr 16, 1990
Status
Published
Author
Zehmer
On the bench
Booth, Nimmons, Zehmer
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 26.7%

The opinion

ZEHMER, Judge

(Concurring).

I concur in the court’s decision and write only to point out that, while there is no authority compelling the appointment of an attorney to represent Brown in this action, in McKay v. Jenkins, 405 So.2d 287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), this court observed:

There is no right to appointed counsel in a civil suit of this type, [citations omitted.] However, we do recognize that a trial judge may, in his discretion, “nonetheless use his historical authority to provide legal assistance^]” and “[w]hen appointment of counsel is desirable but not constitutionally required, the judge should use all available legal aid services, and when these services are unavailable, he should request private counsel to provide the necessary services.”

405 So.2d at 288 , quoting from In the Interest of D.B., 385 So.2d 83, 89 (Fla.1980).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.