Skip to main content

McCray v. State

Citations

  • 71 So. 3d 848
  • 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 383
  • 2011 Fla. LEXIS 1565
  • 2011 WL 2637377

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the trial court could deny defendant’s request to proceed pro se and require that counsel represent uncooperative defendant who had history of disrupting the proceedings
  • holding that a hearing under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), is unnecessary when a defendant makes an ambiguous statement about self-representation rather than an unequivocal request for self-representation
  • noting that “what matters is not the words the trial court employs but rather that the record reflects a defendant who makes a knowing and voluntary waiver of counsel” (internal quotations 16 omitted)
  • holding Muhammad did not apply where the defendant “did not waive all mitigation”
  • upholding court’s competency finding where court held a brief competency hearing at which no witnesses were presented, however the parties stipulated to competence and the court relied on the reports received.
  • addressing the physical removal of a criminal defendant, during trial, from the courtroom

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Canady, Pariente, Lewis, Quince, Polston, Labarga, Perry

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

63 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.