JOHN ESPINOZA, 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 Fourth District affirmed the trial court's summary denial of post-conviction relief under Rule 3.850, except it remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the claim that counsel failed to inform the defendant of the consequences of habitualization on gain time and early release programs.
A trial court's summary denial of post-conviction relief is affirmed except where counsel's failure to inform a defendant of habitualization consequences warrants an evidentiary hearing under Strickland.
[1] Ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on counsel's failure to inform defendant of consequences of habitualization on gain time and early release programs requires…
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 intelligenceEspinoza appealed a trial court order denying his motion for post-conviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, challenging …
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 Gain Time cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a trial court order summarily denying appellant’s motion for post conviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
As to the conviction arising out of lower court case number 92-8714CFA02, we affirm the trial court’s order in all respects. The sentence in that case arose out of appellant’s conviction at a jury trial.
Appellant’s motion was primarily addressed to the guilty pleas he entered in eight separate robbery eases. The pleas were open, in the sense that no sentence was promised; at a later sentencing hearing, the court had the option of sentencing appellant as an habitual violent felony offender, an habitual felony offender, or without enhancement. One portion of the motion alleges ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to make appellant “aware of [what] the consequences of habitualization would mean to him in the way of gain time and early release programs.” See State v. Wilson, 658 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1995); State v. Jefferson, 665 So. 2d 1057 (Fla.1996). On this ground, we remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
As to all other claims for post conviction relief, we find no error in the trial court’s summary denial of the motion and affirm.
WARNER, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ. concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Freels v. State, 701 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…hout an evidentiary hearing or attachments from the trial court files and records which conclusively refute the claim. See also, Lee v. State, 677 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Hills v. State, 671 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Espinoza v. State, 679 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). As to the second of the claims, the appellant asserted that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the improper scoring of two out-of-state convictions. He claimed that he would have received a lesser senten…
Authorities Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984)
- State v. Wilson, 658 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1995)
- State v. Phaneuf, 665 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 1996)
- State v. Jefferson, 665 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 1996)