final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court for the
Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Susan L.
Alspector, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18-001533CF10A.
Finkelstein, Public Defender, and Lisa S. Lawlor, Assistant
Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner.
Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman,
Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for respondent.
defendant in a pending criminal case petitions for certiorari
review of an order that grants the State's request to
have Defendant's third competency evaluation
video-recorded. As no departure from the essential
requirements of law is shown, we deny the petition.
was arrested and charged with armed burglary of a dwelling,
felony battery (prior conviction), and possession of
cannabis. His attorney filed a motion to appoint experts to
evaluate Defendant's competence to stand trial. The first
two court-appointed experts reached differing conclusions:
one opined that Defendant was incompetent, while the second
believed Defendant was malingering. The trial court announced
it would appoint a third expert to conduct an evaluation. The
State subsequently filed a written motion seeking the
court's permission to have the evaluation video-recorded.
objected and, as discussed below, the trial court granted the
State's request that the evaluation be video-recorded. In
so doing, the court noted that the statutes, rules, and
caselaw governing competency evaluations do not preclude
filed two written objections to the trial court order. The
State filed a response. The trial court then heard legal
arguments at a non-evidentiary hearing. The court noted that
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.210(b) allows attorneys
for the State and the defendant to be present during any
court-ordered competency examinations. It rejected
Defendant's objection to the video-recording, concluding
that allowing video-recording was not materially different
from the State's lawyer being present during the
third competency evaluation of Defendant has been stayed
pending our ruling on the instant petition.
lies when there is a departure from the essential
requirements of law which will materially injure the
petitioner and cannot be remedied adequately on appeal.
Duckworth v. State, 923 So.2d 530, 533 (Fla. 4th DCA
2006). "The district courts should exercise [their]
discretion only when there has been a violation of a clearly
established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of
justice." Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93, 96
State has the right to a fair determination and meaningful
opportunity to be heard as to a defendant's competence to
proceed, and absent a showing of good cause by a defendant,
the State has a right to have a competency evaluation by a
court-appointed expert video-recorded. See Maraman v.
State, 980 So.2d 1096, 1100-01 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)
(recognizing the right of a person subjected to compelled
examination to have the examination recorded). Although
Maraman involved the right of a defendant to
videotape a compelled sanity evaluation by a State expert
under rule 3.216(d), ...