DEBRA S. HARTLAND, PETITIONER,
v.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1992-02-06
No. 77659
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur., BARKETT, J., concurs in result only., McDONALD, J., dissents.
592 So. 2d 677 Florida Supreme Court (1992)

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.

Synopsis

The court affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief, holding that pre-hearing discovery is not available to a petitioner alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, and the petitioner failed to overcome the presumption that counsel's actions were sound trial strategy.


Holding

The court held that pre-hearing discovery is not available to a petitioner on a motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, and the petitioner failed to meet the burden of proving counsel's actions were not sound trial strategy.


Facts & Procedural History

The petitioner, convicted of armed robbery, sought post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to certain …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Hartland v. Allstate Insurance Co., 575 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), because of conflict with Jernigan v. Progressive American Insurance Co., 501 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1062 (Fla.1987). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.

We recently addressed the same issue which this case presents. Brixius v. Allstate Ins. Co., 589 So. 2d 236 (Fla.1991). In Brixius, we approved the district court’s decision which denied uninsured motorist benefits under very similar circumstances, and we disapproved the decision in Jerni-gan. Accordingly, the district court’s decision in this case is approved.

It is so ordered.

SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur. BARKETT, J., concurs in result only.

McDONALD, J., dissents.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw