Case Name: Timothy D. CROCKETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-07-21
Citations: 620 So. 2d 1306
Docket Number: No. 93-0215
Parties: Timothy D. CROCKETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: DELL, C.J., and ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 620
Pages: 1306–1306

Head Matter:
Timothy D. CROCKETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 93-0215.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
July 21, 1993.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Paul E. Petillo, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Edward L. Giles, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court failed to make a sufficient inquiry concerning the apparent conflict of interest of appellant's counsel in his representation of appellant as well as a prosecution witness. See DeArce v. State, 405 So.2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA1981).
DELL, C.J., and ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., concur.