Odom v. State
Odom petitioned for certiorari review of a pretrial order finding him competent to stand trial despite conflicting expert testimony, one of whom opined he remained incompetent. The First DCA dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, with Judge Makar's special concurrence explaining that a challenge to the evidentiary sufficiency of a competency finding does not present irreparable harm warranting certiorari review and must instead be raised on direct appeal if convicted.
Key facts
- Odom was found competent to stand trial by the trial court despite conflicting expert testimony, with one expert opining he remained incompetent.
- Odom petitioned for certiorari review seeking to challenge the evidentiary sufficiency of the competency finding.
- +1 more key fact with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion clarifies an important jurisdictional boundary for pretrial competency disputes: practitioners cannot use certiorari to challenge the sufficiency of evidence supporting a competency-restoration finding, but… — 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.