Glispy v. Wild
Glispy v. Wild
591 So. 2d 272; 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10386; 1991 WL 212994
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Glispy v. Wild
Opinion of the Court
The petition is denied.
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I would grant the petition. The petitioner, Terry Glispy, is represented by the public defender’s office. That office also represents two (2) prosecution witnesses. This constitutes a sufficient conflict of interest entitling petitioner to representation by independent counsel. Babb v. Edwards, 412 So.2d 859 (Fla. 1982). Further, because of the important, yet sometimes subtle, effect of such a conflict, this error is not one susceptible to full remedy by a later appeal after petitioner’s case is concluded. Cf. Boudreau v. Carlisle, 549 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Babb v. Edwards.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.