Expressing Dissatisfaction With Lawyer In a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
In Sload v. State, 782 So. 2d 976, 976 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), the Fifth District dismissed, as unauthorized, a criminal defendant's pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, initially filed in this Court and transferred to the Fifth District, even though the petitioner had expressed some dissatisfaction with counsel in his petition, because it was "clear from the allegations of the petition" that he had been represented by counsel at the time he filed his petition.
The Fifth District further noted that Sload's complaints about his counsel appeared to be issues that should be raised in the trial court. See id.
In Prevatt v. State, 776 So. 2d 1114, 1114-15 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), the Fifth District again dismissed, as unauthorized, a criminal defendant's pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking pretrial release or a reduction in the amount of his bond, even though the petitioner stated in his petition "that his present incarceration makes it extremely difficult to consult with his defense attorney," because a criminal defendant "cannot be represented by counsel and at the same time elect self-representation."
See also Howard v. Glover, 794 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (dismissing petition for writ of habeas corpus on the authority of Prevatt).