MICHAEL LEON KING, 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.
Trial court erred by denying post-conviction relief motion without an evidentiary hearing on the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, which was legally sufficient to warrant such a hearing.
A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on a post-conviction motion raising ineffective assistance of counsel when the allegations are legally sufficient, even if other grounds could have been raised on direct appeal.
[1] A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on a post-conviction relief motion when the ineffective assistance of counsel claim is legally sufficient, notwithstandi…
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 intelligenceDefendant King filed a post-conviction relief motion under Rule 3.850 raising multiple grounds, including three that either were raised or could have …
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 Rule 3.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court denied defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief without conducting an evidentiary hearing and without attaching “a copy of that portion of the files and records which conclusively shows that the prisoner is entitled to no relief....” Rule 3.850, Fla.R.Crim.P. Normally, we would be compelled to reverse and remand with instructions to conduct an evidentiary hearing on all issues because of the trial court’s failure to comply with the dictates of the rule. See Cobb v. State, 424 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Jones v. State, 384 So. 2d 736, 738 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). In the case at bar, however, three of the grounds asserted by the defendant either were raised, or could have been raised, on direct appeal and, therefore, cannot serve as a basis for collateral attack. O’Callaghan v. State, 461 So. 2d 1354 (Fla.1984). The remaining ground — a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel— could not have been asserted on direct appeal. Since the allegations are legally suf ficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing, the trial court erred by failing to conduct such a hearing.
Accordingly, the order on appeal is affirmed in part and reversed in part and the cause is remanded with instructions to conduct an evidentiary hearing on defendant’s claim for ineffective assistance of counsel.
HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- O'Callaghan v. State, 461 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 1984)
- Jones v. State, 384 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Cobb v. State, 424 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)