MICHAEL DWAYNE BROWN, 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 court reversed in part and remanded a trial court's denial of post-conviction relief where the record did not conclusively establish that appellant was not entitled to relief on his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform the court of his mental illness and psychiatric medication before accepting his guilty pleas.
A trial court must either hold an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record conclusively establishing no relief is warranted when a defendant claims trial counsel was ineffective for failing to disclose his mental illness and psychiatric medication before accepting guilty pleas.
[1] When a defendant claims trial counsel was ineffective for failing to disclose mental illness and psychiatric medication before guilty pleas were entered, the trial court…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant, an inmate, filed a motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, claiming his trial counsel was ineffec…
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 Mental Competency cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, an inmate of the state correctional system, seeks review of an order denying his motion, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, seeking post-conviction relief. In his motion, appellant raised a number of grounds. We affirm the trial court’s denial as to all of the grounds, save one, without discussion. However, as to the remaining ground, we are constrained to reverse.
In his motion, appellant asserted that his trial counsel had been ineffective because, although aware at the time appellant entered pleas of guilty to second-degree murder and armed robbery that appellant had a history of mental illness and was being treated with Thorazine, Elavill and Sinequan while incarcerated awaiting trial, trial counsel did not advise the trial court of those circumstances. Appellant asserted, further, that, as a result of his mental illness and the drugs with which he was being treated, he was confused and unable to comprehend what was taking place, rendering his pleas involuntary. The portions of the record attached to the trial court’s order do not establish conclusively that appellant is entitled to no relief on the basis of these assertions. Accordingly, we reverse as to these assertions only, and remand to the trial court with directions that it either hold an evidentiary hearing, or attach to its order denying relief without a hearing portions of the record which establish conclusively that appellant is entitled to no relief.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.
ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miller v. State, 676 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…c allegation, if true, is a violation of the Williams3 rule. The instant record fails to show that this claim lacks merit. The trial judge summarily denied postconviction relief without attaching relevant portions of the record. See Brown v. State, 672 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (holding that a remand is required for the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing on the posteonviction motion or to attach to its order denying relief without a hearing the portions of the record establishing conclusi…