GEORGE BRUCE THORNBURG, 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.
Appellant George Bruce Thornburg challenges the trial court's denial of his motion for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and an improperly prepared sentencing scoresheet that formed the basis of his guilty plea to manslaughter. The appellate court reverses because the trial court summarily denied the motion without properly addressing the allegations that appellant's counsel misrepresented the plea bargain consequences and failed to advise him of scoresheet errors.
The appellate court reverses and remands, holding that facially sufficient allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be summarily denied without attaching portions of the record demonstrating conclusively that the defendant is not entitled to relief. When a post-conviction motion alleges the defendant understood the plea bargain contemplated a sentence within guidelines, rather than as a departure sentence, the trial court must attach documentation refuting the allegations or conduct an evidentiary hearing.
[1] Facially sufficient allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel may not be denied summarily without attaching record portions that conclusively demonstrate the defen…
[2] Misstatements by counsel regarding the consequences of a guilty plea constitute facially sufficient grounds for post-conviction relief, provided the defendant alleges the…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“It is well settled that facially sufficient allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel may not be denied summarily, without attachment of those portions of the record which demonstrate conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief.”
Establishes the standard for reviewing post-conviction motions alleging ineffective assistance of counsel; summary denial is improper without complete record review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged with second-degree murder but pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The sentencing scoresheet incorrectly scored manslaughter as a fir…
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 Negotiated Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
JOANOS, Chief Judge.
Appellant seeks review of the trial court’s order denying his motion for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. As grounds for relief, the motion raised claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, an improperly prepared scoresheet which served as the basis for appellant’s plea, and an illegal sentence due to an incorrect score-sheet. We reverse.
The facts as set forth in the motion allege that appellant was charged with sec ond-degree murder, but pled guilty to manslaughter. In support of the asserted claims, the motion asserted that (1) appellant’s plea was based on a representation that the plea bargain sentence was within the guidelines; (2) appellant’s counsel failed to note that manslaughter was scored as a first degree, rather than a second degree felony; and (3) appellant’s counsel failed to advise him of the score-sheet error. The motion further alleged that the scoresheet, which incorrectly indicated a recommended sentence of up to twenty-two years rather than the twelve year maximum penalty for manslaughter, formed the basis of the plea.
Finally, the motion alleged that due to scoresheet error, appellant had no knowledge that he pled to a sentence in excess of the recommended guidelines range.
The trial court’s denial of the motion was premised in part on the rule that a negotiated sentence may exceed the guidelines, and in part on findings that the written plea demonstrated an uncoereed negotiated sentence of fourteen years, and appellant knowingly and voluntarily entered into a written plea of guilty and bargained for a fourteen year sentence. The first page of the form guilty plea and negotiated sentence was attached to the order, as support for the trial court’s findings.
It is well settled that facially sufficient allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel may not be denied summarily, without attachment of those portions of the record which demonstrate conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief. Boutwell v. State, 563 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Shaffner v. State, 562 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Williamson v. State, 559 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Among other things, misstatements of counsel as to the consequences of a plea constitute facially sufficient grounds for relief. Shaffner, 562 So. 2d at 431.
However, such motion is facially insufficient if it fails to allege that the defendant would not have entered the plea if his attorney had not made the misstatement. Id., citing Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 60, 106 S.Ct. 366, 371, 88 L.Ed.2d 203, 211 (1985); Duggan v. State, 588 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Wilson v. State, 559 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).
A plea bargain may serve as a clear and convincing reason for a departure sentence, when the departure reason was accepted as an integral part of the bargain itself. See Smith v. State, 530 So. 2d 304 (Fla.1988); Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1988).
However, where the allegations of the motion for post-conviction relief indicate the defendant’s understanding that his plea bargain contemplated a sentence within the guidelines, remand is required for further proceedings, i.e., attachment of documentation conclusively showing the defendant is not entitled to relief, or for an evidentiary hearing. Cannon v. State, 548 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
In Calleja v. State, 562 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), the plea bargain was based on an incorrect scoresheet. The allegations of the 3.850 motion indicated the defendant neither understood nor accepted the bargain as a departure sentence. The court held that in such circumstances, the defendant must be permitted to withdraw his plea, if he elects not to accept the original sentence which was based on an incorrect scoresheet.
Because the allegations of the motion are not refuted by the portion of the record attached to the order denying relief, the cause is remanded with directions to attach those portions of the record which demonstrate that appellant is entitled to no relief, or for an evidentiary hearing. See Gardner v. State, 550 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
ERVIN, J., and WENTWORTH, Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Eady v. State, 604 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…n may serve as a clear and convincing reason for a departure sentence when accepted as an integral part of the plea agreement. Smith v. State, 530 So. 2d 304, 305 (Fla.1988); Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380, 1382 (Fla.1988); Thornburg v. State, 591 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Since the record in this case reflects that the departure sentence was integral to the plea bargain, appellant’s challenge to the validity of the reason for departure must fail. Turning to the scoresheet challenge, appellant co…
-
Bush v. State, 596 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…convincing reason for a departure sentence, when the departure reason was accepted as an integral part of the bargain itself, Smith v. State, 530 So. 2d 304, 305 (Fla.1988); Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380, 1382 (Fla.1988); Thornburg v. State, 591 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), the sentence as imposed was proper notwithstanding appellant’s present objections. The trial judge properly noted in writing that this was a “negotiated upward departure” based upon a plea bargain as to the three cases. See Ree…
-
Hickey v. State, 740 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…ither by his trial counsel, or the trial court, prior to his plea that he was agreeing to a departure sentence and that such agreement would provide the basis to impose the departure sentence. Accordingly, this constitutes error. Thornburg v. State, 591 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) We therefore, reverse and remand as to issue three, and the trial court shall upon remand either attach additional record excerpts that conclusively disprove Hickey’s claim that he was not properly advised concerning the fact t…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (12 total)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985)
- THE Florida BAR v. Mullins, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla. 1988)
- Duggan v. State, 588 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Shaffner v. State, 562 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Kropff v. Dep't OF Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles, 530 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 1988)
- Boutwell v. State, 563 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Williamson v. State, 559 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Calleja v. State, 562 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Gardner v. State, 550 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Cannon v. State, 548 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)