Case Name: In the Interest of J.H., a child
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-02-13
Citations: 580 So. 2d 162
Docket Number: No. 89-3220
Parties: In the Interest of J.H., a child.
Judges: LETTS, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 580
Pages: 162–165

Head Matter:
In the Interest of J.H., a child.
No. 89-3220.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Feb. 13, 1991.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Cherry Grant, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The dispositive issue of this appeal is whether appellant, a juvenile, intelligently waived her right to have counsel present at her motion to suppress, adjudicatory hearing and "no contest" plea by executing the following form which apparently is used in all Broward County Courts:
TO THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
This is to certify that I hereby consent to having ALAN LEVINE appointed by the Office of the Public Defender to act in my defense.
I acknowledge that I have been advised and understand that ALAN LEVINE is a certified law student and has complied with Chapter 11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court Regulating the Florida Bar and is certified by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida and is supervised in this case by an attorney on the Staff of the Public Defender's Office.
DATED this 7th day of December, 1989.
(signed J.H.)
APPROVAL OF APPEARANCE
As Assistant Public Defender and as the supervising Attorney, I hereby give my approval of his/her appearance in the above cited matter.
(initialed)
Assistant Public Defender
The form was filed in the courtroom on the day the certified legal intern handled appellant's motion to suppress, adjudicatory hearing and "no contest" plea, all of which events took place without the presence of the supervising attorney who signed the motion to suppress.
The Broward County form does not state that appellant has a right to have a "supervising attorney personally present when required by the trial judge." Fla.Bar R. Governing the Law School Civil and Criminal Practice Program, Rule ll-1.2(a). Nor was appellant advised of that right at the time she entered her plea. We hold that without such information appellant could not have intelligently waived her right to be represented by a lawyer.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand with direction to the trial court to conduct a new adjudicatory hearing after appellant is given the opportunity to withdraw her plea. Nevertheless, we certify the following question as being one of great public importance:
Does the consent form used in Bro-ward County's courts constitute a waiver of the indigent's right to have an attorney present at a hearing on motion to suppress and adjudication?
LETTS, J., concurs.
GLICKSTEIN, J., concurs specially with opinion.
GARRETT, J., concurs specially with opinion.