Schlicher v. State
Schlicher v. State
Opinion of the Court
At issue is whether appellant’s sentence should be vacated because of the trial court’s alleged erroneous determination that there was no reasonable ground to believe appellant was insane.
While we are reluctant to interfere with judgment calls, the potential for manifest injustice in this case can only be erased by our intrusion into the decision making process. Appellant’s pre-sentence motion, raising the issue of insanity, alleged that appellant had recently attempted suicide by seriously cutting both his arms.
I wish you’d give the psychiatric treatment as serious attention as you possibly can. I feel that David should have had it long before this, but I was never able to afford it. And God knows we need it.
Under these circumstances, reasonable ground to believe appellant was insane did exist.
. See Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.740(a) and 3.720(a)(1).
. The prosecutor’s response at the hearing on appellant’s motion was that appellant’s act was done to get a better cell. Once that was accomplished, there was no recurrence of self-inflicted wounds. The trial judge determined that an attempted suicide did not create the required reasonable ground for believing appellant insane.
.See Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162, 95 S.Ct. 896, 43 L.Ed.2d 103 (1975); Lane v. State, 388 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 1980).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.