Glee v. State

Glee v. State, 639 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided: July 20, 1994
Docket: No. 93-1812
Judges: Per Curiam
Citations: 639 So. 2d 10921994 WL 375795

Cited by 7 2 descriptions by later courts

Opinion — Per Curiam

639 So.2d 1092 (1994)

Frank L. GLEE, Appellant,

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 93-1812.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 20, 1994.

*1093 Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Eric M. Cumfer, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sarah B. Mayer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from his conviction and sentence Frank L. Glee argues that it was reversible error for the trial judge to leave the courtroom during the readback of testimony by the court reporter. We agree, and reverse and remand for a new trial.

An accused has a fundamental right to have the trial judge present at all stages of the proceedings. Brown v. State, 538 So.2d 833 (Fla. 1989). The accused may waive that right in certain limited circumstances, but not through counsel acting alone. Id. See also Jackson v. State, 636 So.2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Maldonado v. State, 634 So.2d 661 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); and Young v. State, 591 So.2d 651 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). We agree with our sister court that this issue is not susceptible to a harmless error test. See Peri v. State, 426 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 436 So.2d 100 (Fla. 1983).

The foregoing analysis renders moot the additional points on appeal.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DELL, C.J., HERSEY, J., and DAUKSCH, JAMES C., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

(right to judge's presence during read-back of testimony can be waived, but not through counsel acting alone)

Morris v. State, 715 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
(“[T]his issue is not susceptible to a harmless error test.”)

Strachan v. State of Fla., No. 18-0868 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Oct. 2, 2019)

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Harbaugh v. State711 So. 2d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
Ferrer v. Manning682 So. 2d 659 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Raymond F. Riley v. George Deeds56 F.3d 1117 (9th Cir. 1995)
Morris v. State715 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
CHRISTOPHER A. STRACHAN v. STATE OF FLORIDANo. 18-0868 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Oct. 2, 2019)
Alexis Salgado-Mantilla v. the State of FloridaNo. 3D2022-2151 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Oct. 16, 2024)

Most recent

Alexis Salgado-Mantilla v. the State of FloridaNo. 3D2022-2151 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Feb. 12, 2025)
Alexis Salgado-Mantilla v. the State of FloridaNo. 3D2022-2151 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Oct. 16, 2024)
CHRISTOPHER A. STRACHAN v. STATE OF FLORIDANo. 18-0868 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Oct. 2, 2019)
Morris v. State715 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
Harbaugh v. State711 So. 2d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
Ferrer v. Manning682 So. 2d 659 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Brown v. State, 538 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 1989)	29
	Peri v. State, 426 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)	32
	Maldonado v. State, 634 So. 2d 661 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)	9
	Young v. State, 591 So. 2d 651 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)	5
	Jackson v. State, 636 So. 2d 99 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)	1

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list