SEAN JAMES KOEHLER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District reversed in part a trial court's summary denial of Appellant Koehler's Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion. The court found the trial court erred in summarily denying claims that trial counsel was ineffective regarding youthful offender sentencing advice and out-of-state jail credit, and remanded for further proceedings.
The trial court erred in summarily denying Ground One because Appellant did not allege all Alcorn factors, but he should be given an opportunity to amend. The trial court also erred in summarily denying the out-of-state jail credit portion of Ground Five because such claims are cognizable and Appellant was not required to prove his allegations at the summary denial stage, necessitating an evidentiary hearing unless other records refute the claim.
[1] A claim that trial counsel failed to object to the court's denial of out-of-state jail credit on Florida offenses is cognizable in a Rule 3.850 proceeding and cannot be s…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We reverse in part the summary denial of Appellant's Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion.”
Establishes that the appellate court is partially reversing the trial court's summary denial decision.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Koehler filed a Rule 3.850 motion challenging the effectiveness of his trial counsel. Ground One alleged that counsel misadvised him about e…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plea Offer cases and more on FLexlaw
*1302We reverse in part the summary denial of Appellant's Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. Appellant challenges the summary denial of Ground One of his motion in which he claimed that counsel misadvised him about eligibility for youthful offender sentencing, causing him to reject a plea offer. The allegations are insufficient in that Appellant did not allege all of the Alcorn1 factors. Nevertheless, Appellant should be given an opportunity to amend. See Charles v. State , 193 So.3d 46, 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016).
The trial court also erred in summarily denying that portion of Ground Five in which Appellant alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the court's failure to give him credit for time served in jail in North Carolina on the Florida offenses. This claim is cognizable in this proceeding. See Bonilla v. State , 110 So.3d 492, 492 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (holding that claim seeking out-of-state jail credit may be raised on direct appeal or in rule 3.850 motion). Because Appellant was not required to provide proof of his allegations at this stage, his failure to prove entitlement to the out-of-state credit does not support summary denial. Accordingly, an evidentiary hearing on this portion of Ground Five is necessary unless other records refute the claim.
In all other respects, we affirm.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
TORPY, BERGER and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Alcorn v. State, 121 So. 3d 419 (Fla. 2013)
- Enel Charles v. State, 193 So. 3d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
- Bonilla v. State, 110 So. 3d 492 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)