McDermott v. State
McDermott filed a habeas petition alleging his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue that the trial court erred under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410 when it failed to advise the jury it could request a read-back after jurors sought transcripts of specific witnesses' testimony. The Fifth District agreed, holding the claim meritorious, and granted the petition to authorize a new appeal limited to that issue, while noting the error is subject to harmless-error rather than per se reversal because the jury's request was specific.
Key facts
- McDermott was convicted at trial; the trial court failed to advise the jury it could request a read-back of testimony after jurors sought transcripts of specific witnesses' testimony.
- McDermott filed a habeas petition claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue on direct appeal that the trial court violated Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410(b)(2) by not offering the read-back option.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion usefully applies and reinforces the Florida Supreme Court's Johnson/Hazuri/Barrow framework distinguishing per se reversible error (general transcript requests) from harmless-error analysis (specific… — 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.