TONY MAURICE LAMPKIN, 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 appellate court reversed the denial of a post-conviction relief motion, finding that the appellant may have received ineffective assistance of counsel. The court remanded the case to determine if the appellant was erroneously advised about the consequences of his guilty plea regarding habitual offender sentencing.
The court held that the summary denial of the motion for post-conviction relief was improper. The case is remanded to determine if the appellant was erroneously advised about the consequences of his plea due to counsel's misunderstanding of the amended habitual offender statute.
[1] A defendant may be entitled to post-conviction relief upon a showing that trial counsel was ineffective in advising the defendant regarding the consequences of a guilty p…
[2] An attorney's misunderstanding of statutory amendments affecting sentencing requirements can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The only meritorious issue raised on appeal is that the trial court should have allowed evidence to be presented to show that Lamp-kin’s trial counsel was ineffective.”
Identifies the central legal issue on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Tony Maurice Lampkin pleaded guilty to escape after his trial counsel advised him that the state could not sentence him as a habitual offend…
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 Consequences cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, Judge.
Tony Maurice Lampkin appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. The only meritorious issue raised on appeal is that the trial court should have allowed evidence to be presented to show that Lamp-kin’s trial counsel was ineffective. Lamp-kin claims that his counsel was ineffective in advising him to plead guilty to the charge of escape even though the state had indicated it would seek an enhanced penalty under the habitual offender statute. Lampkin also claims that counsel advised him that the trial court could not sentence him as a habitual offender since no grounds existed to find that he was a danger to society. Lampkin was sentenced on July 17, 1989. Section 775.084, Florida Statutes, had been amended as of October 1, 1988, to eliminate the requirement of a factual finding that enhancement was necessary for the protection of the public.
The record of the sentencing hearing does not make it clear that Lampkin’s trial counsel understood the reduced requirements of the amended section 775.084. He stated:
It appears to me that the policy of the State Attorney’s office up to date, since this new statute has come out, is to play it as conservatively as possible. That is to say anybody who has two prior felonies, that they are a candidate and they are going to be enhanced.
Now, I don’t believe this to be the intent of the legislature, nor the people that are involved according to the statute. According to the statute we must find, of course, this man a danger to society....
We therefore reverse the summary denial of Lampkin’s 3.850 motion and remand with directions either to attach portions of the record that show conclusively that summary denial is appropriate or to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Lampkin is entitled to relief because he was advised erroneously as to the consequences of his plea.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McCOY v. State, 598 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…if the defendant also alleges that the guilty plea would not have been entered but for his attorney’s advice. See Shaffner v. State, 562 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). See also Jones v. State, 589 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Lampkin v. State, 589 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Brown v. State, 588 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Siegel v. State, 586 So. 2d 1341 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Colon v. State, 586 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Similarly, a defendant’s allegation that his attorney failed to [*171]…