VINCENT ALLEN, 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 court reversed the trial court's summary denial of a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion for ineffective assistance of counsel and plea coercion because the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach record portions refuting the allegations.
A trial court cannot summarily deny a Rule 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and plea coercion without either conducting an evidentiary hearing or attaching record portions that conclusively refute the allegations.
[1] A trial court must either conduct an evidentiary hearing on a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion or attach record portions conclusively refuting the allegations before summ…
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 intelligenceAppellant Allen filed a postconviction motion under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.850 raising two allegations: denial of effective assistance …
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 Coercion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This appeal is from the summary denial of a motion seeking postconviction relief under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Appellant raised two points in the motion. The allegations in paragraphs one and two that appellant was denied effective assistance of counsel, and coercion of his plea, if true, would entitle appellant to relief. The trial court, however, failed to either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record which refute those allegations.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, the trial court may either again summarily deny the motion as to the allegations specified, and attach to its order those portions of the record which conclusively show that appellant is not entitled to relief, or hold an evidentiary hearing and then rule on the grounds alleged in the motion. See Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.850; see also Jones v. State, 421 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and Van Bever v. State, 405 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). To obtain further review, any aggrieved party must appeal the new ruling of the trial court.
Therefore, the order appealed from is REVERSED and the cause is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and LEHAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bradfield v. State, 466 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…tach to its order those portions of the record which conclusively show appellant is not entitled to relief or hold an evidentiary hearing and then rule on the ground alleged in point I of the motion. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850; see also Allen v. State, 427 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Jones v. State, 421 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Should appellant be dissatisfied with the new ruling, he must file a new appeal. RYDER, C.J., and GRIMES and LE-HAN, JJ., concur.…
-
Rogers v. State, 467 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…Young v. State, 453 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Monson v. State, 443 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Likewise, ineffective assistance of counsel is a well-recognized ground for relief under rule 3.850. Monson, 443 So. 2d at 1062; Allen v. State, 427 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Brown v. State, 409 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Here, Rogers’ claims of perjured testimony and ineffective assistance are sufficient on their face, and if true, may entitle Rogers to post-conviction relief. Accordingly, the p…
-
Waring v. State, 504 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…of probation purposes. The level of evidence required to support a revocation of probation does not call for evidence sufficient to support a criminal conviction. James v. State, 452 So. 2d 1048 (Fla.2d DCA 1984), State ex rel. Russell v. McGlothin, 427 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). We strike the invalid reasons for revocation of appellant’s probation and affirm the trial court’s order. See Smith v. State, 380 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). In view of the trial court’s failure to file a sentencing guid…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 421 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- VAN Bever v. State, 405 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)