ANTHONY NEAL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ANTHONY NEAL, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
624 So. 2d 380
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1993)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the summary denial of defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to rule 3.850, Fla.R.Crim.P., and remand for an evidentiary hearing or attachments of portions of the record and file conclusively showing that appellant is not entitled to relief on the second ground of his motion.
Reversed.
ANSTEAD, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alwin Charles Tumblin v. State, 747 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…supplied). The inescapable inference is that the co-defendant told the officer that Tumblin, the second person involved in the crime, was down the road. As then Judge Anstead said in quoting an appellant’s brief in his dissent in Rodriguez v. State, 624 So. 2d 380, 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to make the logical inference from that data.” The admission of this testimony was error. The only other evidence directly linking appellant to the crime was the in-court identification…
-
Jackson v. State, 634 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…atever sentence” he imposed would run “concurrent”. Thus, the trial judge had an affirmative duty to give appellant the opportunity to withdraw his plea where the sentence given was consecutive and not concurrent as promised. See Rodriguez v. State, 624 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Tamers v. State, 284 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). We therefore must remand this cause to the trial court with directions that appellant be allowed to withdraw his plea and plead anew. We also agree with appellant that the t…