FL - Sarah Boone, 42, charged with murdering boyfriend Jorge Torres, 42, by leaving him locked in suitcase, Winter Park, Feb 2020

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

GuyfromCanada said:
JUL 2

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. - Sarah Boone, the Florida woman accused of killing her boyfriend by locking him inside a suitcase at their Winter Park home during an alleged game of hide-and-seek, has forfeited her right to any more court-appointed defense lawyers – and will now have to represent herself at her trial, according to the judge overseeing her case.

More at Sarah Boone loses 8th lawyer, must now represent herself in Florida murder trial, judge rules

Not sure how I feel about this as Sarah would most likely be appealing later on (after the trial) that she was forced to represent herself on a very serious charge and had no defense attorney to help her out. Could this cause legal jeopardy later on?
Click to expand...
IMO, this order will not be just cause for an appeal because there is legal precedent.

Per the court order linked below —

FORFEITURE OF RIGHT TO COUNSEL

OO. A defendant in a criminal case can forfeit a right to court-appointed counsel.

PP. “[A] forfeiture is an extreme measure that flows ‘from the defendant's abuse or manipulation of [the right to counsel] and results in the defendant being required to represent himself even though he has not waived counsel and may still want legal representation.” K.R. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 368 So. 3d 986, 991 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) citing Commonwealth v. Means, 454 Mass. 81, 907 N.E.2d 646, 652 (2009). Forfeiture is a “judicial response that adapts the course of the legal proceedings to the defendant's choice to engage in misconduct that undermines the legitimate exercise of the right to counsel.” Id. citing to State v. Nisbet, 134 A.3d 840, 853 n.3 (Me. 2016) citing Means, 907 N.E.2d at 652.

QQ. As set forth above, Defendant’s recalcitrance to the attorneys who were not conflicted out (Padilla, Bankowitz, Hobson, and Cashman), antagonism, hostility, and attacks on the professionalism of Padilla (notably, over a year after the fact, see footnote 9 above), of Bankowitz, and of Cashman, and personal attacks on Padilla, Bankowitz, and Cashman. Each of these attorneys were required to withdraw.

RR. It has become apparent to the Court that Defendant will not permit herself to be represented by anyone. See also United States v. Travers, 996 F. Supp. 6, 8-15 and 16-17 (S.D. Fla. 1998).

SS. Additionally, the withdrawal of eight different attorneys, seven of which were court appointed, leads to a determination that Defendant had forfeited his right to counsel. See Watson v. State, 718 So. 2d 253, 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) receded from on other grounds by Waller v. State, 911 So. 2d 226, 228 & n.2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).

TT. Under Florida law, the facts at bar amount to a binding forfeiture of the right to counsel. See Jackson v. State, 2 So. 3d 1036, 1037 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)

UU. As the Court finds Defendant has forfeited the right to court-appointed counsel, under Florida law there is no obligation to conduct a Faretta hearing or to otherwise warn a defendant of the dangers of proceeding pro se. See Bowden v. State, 150 So. 3d 264, 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).

WAIVER BY CONDUCT

VV. The Court can find a waiver by conduct to the right to counsel. “[A] ‘waiver by conduct’ requires that a defendant be warned about the consequences of his conduct, including the risks of proceeding pro se.” United States v. Goldberg, 67 F.3d 1092, 1101 (3d Cir. 1995).

WW. On February 9, 2024, Defendant was twice advised that another court appointed attorney may not be provided.

XX. On May 10, 2022, Defendant was advised about the dangers of self-representation.

YY. On February 9, 2024, Defendant was advised about the dangers of self-representation.

ZZ. As of February 9, 2024, the instant case had been continued 16 times.

AAA. As of June 26, 2024, this case has been pending 4 years, 3 months, 5 days from the date of the filing of the information on March 23, 2020.

BBB. Actions speak louder than words. Although Defendant’s words seemingly reveal a desire to go to trial, however, as set forth herein, her actions and inability to work with court appointed counsel, are repeated over and over. Allowing Defendant to her eighth court appointed attorney (her ninth attorney overall) will only serve to delay the case further and encourage Defendant to persist in efforts to prevent the resolution of the case on its merits (the concept of which was first brought Defendant’s attention on May 10, 2022). Defendant complains that Bankowitz and Hobson (two court-appointed attorneys) failed to meet and communicate and when Defendant is provided court-appointed counsel who will meet and communicate (Cashman), the ways and means of meeting and communicating are unacceptable to Defendant.

CCC. Under Florida law, the facts at bar amount to a binding waiver of the right to counsel. See Jackson v. State, 2 So. 3d 1036, 1037 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)

Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com acrobat.adobe.com
 
Evidently there was another letter and maybe another hearing right before the judge let the attorney off the hook and made his pro se ruling. In it, Sarah tries to apple-polish the judge in an effort to convince him to make the attorney be nice to her. She also says the discovery has to be handed over to her, and the attorney has been remiss in doing so. Haha! The judge evidently wrote that into his order, perhaps to appease her and get her at least some of what she wanted or else "Sure, no prob. No sweat on my back". Be careful what you ask for: it might boomerang.

I'll bet the apple-polishing didn't last beyond the pro se order......
 
Last edited:
renah said:
Holy Moly. Holy wowzers. I kept waiting for the punchline of "Gotcha this is a spoof and Ms. Boone didn't actually write this"!

But nope, punchline did not appear. It's real! All real, right down to putting the judge's title of "Honorable" in quotes throughout...
Click to expand...

Wait, what? I thought that "Looking for an attorney"
page was a spoof not for real. I had to go back and sure enough she did write it, it is at end of her letter.

Panniniclaus said:
Has she had a psychological assessment? Maybe she is trying to push towards insanity with all this.
Click to expand...

No chance because of her prolific letters and ability to understand her charges and "engage" in her defense.

But everyone wonders why is she acting like this? I also wondered about insanity.....maybe she is mentally ill but doesn't know it herself...I think she should be evaluated by a psychiatrist.

Someone posted that maybe she is deliberately stalling her trial.....It worked.

Also, maybe this is her way to document insufficient counsel for an appeal, all these letters she writes complain about bad counsel.
 
Cool Cats said:
Wait, what? I thought that "Looking for an attorney"
page was a spoof not for real. I had to go back and sure enough she did write it, it is at end of her letter.



No chance because of her prolific letters and ability to understand her charges and "engage" in her defense.

But everyone wonders why is she acting like this? I also wondered about insanity.....maybe she is mentally ill but doesn't know it herself...I think she should be evaluated by a psychiatrist.

Someone posted that maybe she is deliberately stalling her trial.....It worked.

Also, maybe this is her way to document insufficient counsel for an appeal, all these letters she writes complain about bad counsel.
Click to expand...
I agree she is not legally insane, although I do question whether her longterm goal planning is significantly impaired. She certainly seems to possess a roiling mass of personality disorders, but that doesn't qualify with the court. IMO complaining & sarcasm are her psyche's main driving force. And I think it's clear that her judgment is wayyyy off.

I've never known, read of, or even imagined someone so spectacularly tone deaf!
 
renah said:
I agree she is not legally insane, although I do question whether her longterm goal planning is significantly impaired. She certainly seems to possess a roiling mass of personality disorders, but that doesn't qualify with the court. IMO complaining & sarcasm are her psyche's main driving force. And I think it's clear that her judgment is wayyyy off.

I've never known, read of, or even imagined someone so spectacularly tone deaf!
Click to expand...
"A rolling mass of personality disorders" -- exactly.

I didn't understand insanity/incompentence/etc until I saw it up close in the LeteciaStauch trial. Not insane but... insane. There is true insanity which she didn't have, and while she may have had a rolling mass of mental illnesses, what she predominantly had was maybe all the personality disorders, what I affectionately refer to as Cluster F. SarahB, poster child.

(My sympathy goes out to people with health issues of all kinds, especially those shouldering mental illness and/or personality disorders and are doing the work of managing them. IMO LeteciaS and SarahB are what happen when you have high-grade, unchecked personality disorders. They can murder another human being, feel neither remorse nor responsibility, and have the unmitigated gall to demand privileges.)

Sarah's wishlist for her next attorney? Cray cray. She thinks there's a path to freedom here? That's delusional. Not insanity. Just so full of herself she can't fathom anyone seeing anything any way bit her way. So this unicorn of an attorney needs to be a cheerleader, be a beacon of hope and crumpets, set aside all reason and present whatever royal nonsense Sarah drafts, complete with artsy script and grandiose junk.

Is there a courtroom large enough, to contain her big head?

Ugh.

JMO
 
watergirl62 said:
New 7-page letter, going off on the judge.

View attachment 519324

Click to expand...
Blessedly, it's only 7 pages, not 700, but Lord. The arrogance.

She actually wrote, ahead of her actual case number, that she's 1, on some websites.

She really is on par with LeteciaStauch who bludgeoning a child to death (beat, stabbed, shot). I'm beginning to wonder if there's a specific mess of personality disorders where the concept of Constitutional violation is a symptom.

Is there a point at which we can take away her paper?

Please make it stop.

JMO
 
So the point of her letter was that she hasn't received her case notes and discovery but she took the opportunity to insult the judge. There's no one else left to insult now. Will she turn on herself?

She took 7 pages of sarcasm and bile to talk around the subject and not say 'please confirm what date I will receive all relevant files in order that I may prepare my defence'.

It would be some almighty eff up if parts of her files and notes have gone missing through all this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 82 more.
Total: 2,052 (members: 83, guests: 1,969)

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
1,969
Total visitors
2,052
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,248
Messages
18,105,872
Members
230,993
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top