← Case library
3rd DCAMay 13, 2026Petition Granted; Order Quashed; Question Certified🔬 Novel Issue

Justice Administrative Commission v. Jackson

Case No. 3D2022-2082

The Third DCA granted JAC's certiorari petition and quashed a trial court order appointing private co-counsel (and requiring JAC to pay his fees) for a death-penalty defendant who already had privately retained lead counsel but claimed he could not afford a second attorney for the penalty phase. Reading sections 27.51(2), 27.40, 27.5303, and 27.511(7) in pari materia, and relying on Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.112(e), the court held that Chapter 27 does not permit hybrid representation in capital cases where the defendant already has retained counsel—he must choose between keeping retained counsel or forgoing it entirely for court-appointed representation.

Key facts

  • Justice Administrative Commission (JAC) sought certiorari review of a trial court order appointing privately retained co-counsel for a death-penalty defendant's penalty phase and requiring JAC to pay the co-counsel's fees.
  • The defendant had already retained private lead counsel but claimed he could not afford to retain a second attorney for the capital penalty phase and sought court appointment of co-counsel at public expense.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

This opinion resolves a significant statutory conflict affecting how capital defendants obtain penalty-phase co-counsel and squarely holds there is no 'hybrid' representation option under current Chapter 27 when a… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.