RONALD LEE GUISASOLA, 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.
This case involves an appeal from the summary denial of a post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court found that the motion presented sufficient allegations regarding the investigation and presentation of a voluntary intoxication defense, warranting an evidentiary hearing.
The appellate court held that the trial court erred in summarily denying the motion without an evidentiary hearing. The allegations in the motion were sufficient to require a hearing to determine if counsel's actions or inactions regarding the voluntary intoxication defense were strategic or constituted ineffective assistance.
[1] A post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the investigation and presentation of a voluntary intoxication defense may set forth suffici…
[2] A trial court's determination that defense counsel's action or inaction was tactical is generally inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing.
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“We find that appellant’s motion sets forth sufficient allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel as to the investigation and presentation of a voluntary intoxication defense.”
Establishes the basis for the appellate court's decision to reverse the lower court's denial.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant filed a post-conviction motion alleging his counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and present a voluntary intoxication defe…
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 Strategic Decisions Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
[*249] MICKLE, Judge.
This cause is before us on appeal from the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s post-conviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
We find that appellant’s motion sets forth sufficient allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel as to the investigation and presentation of a voluntary intoxication defense. See McCoy v. State, 598 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Brunson v. State, 605 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
The trial judge denied relief on the basis that (1) the factual allegations set forth in the motion revealed that defense counsel was aware of appellant’s cocaine usage, and (2) defense counsel made a strategic decision to utilize the evidence of appellant’s history of cocaine abuse solely during the penalty phase of the trial. It is true that a trial attorney may make a tactical decision not to pursue the defense of involuntary intoxication. See e.g. Bland v. State, 563 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Harich v. State, 484 So. 2d 1239 (Fla.1986); and Buford v. State, 492 So. 2d 355 (Fla.1986).
However, a trial court’s finding that some action or inaction by defense counsel was tactical is generally inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing. Murphy v. State, 638 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Thomas v. State, 634 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Herein, absent an adequate rec ord, and without the benefit of an evidentiary hearing, we are in no position to affirm whether the omission of such a defense was a strategic move, particularly in view of the fact that appellant was charged with a specific intent crime entitling him to a jury instruction on voluntary intoxication where there was evidence of intoxication at the time of the offense. See Gardner v. State, 480 So. 2d 91 (Fla.1985); Price v. State, 487 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Reed v. State, 611 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
We are compelled to REVERSE and REMAND to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing.
BOOTH and MINER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Evans v. State, 737 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). A trial court’s finding that defense action or inaction is the result of trial strategy will generally be disapproved if the decision is made without the benefit of an evidentiary hearing. See Gwisasola v. State, 667 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). The failure of Evans’ attorney to pursue this issue on cross-examination, unrefuted by attachments to the record, warrants an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the trial court in part with instructions t…
-
Kitchen v. State, 764 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…(Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Counsel may make a tactical decision not to pursue a voluntary intoxication defense, but a trial court’s finding that such a decision was tactical usually is inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing. See Guisasola v. State, 667 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). This ground, as alleged by appellant, appears to be legally sufficient and should not have been summarily denied without the attachment of portions of the record demonstrating conclusively that the movant is not entitled to reli…
-
Tauric Lamar Griggs v. State, 744 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…was sound trial strategy under the circumstances. We agree with appellant that “a trial court’s finding that some action or inaction by defense counsel was tactical is generally inappropriate without an eviden-. tiary hearing.” Guisasola v. State, 667 So. 2d 248, 249 (Fla. 1st DCA1995) (reversing summary denial of claim that counsel was ineffective in investigation and presentation of voluntary intoxication defense). We affirm as to appellant’s other two grounds, reverse as to the first ground, and remand…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- Gardner v. State, 480 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 1985)
- Harich v. State, 484 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 1986)
- Buford v. State, 492 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 1986)
- McCOY v. State, 598 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Price v. State, 487 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Thornton Brunson v. State, 605 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Bland v. State, 563 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Murphy v. State, 638 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
- Reed v. State, 611 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Henderson v. State, 634 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)