MICHAEL REID, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1999-12-08
No. 99-1099
BOOTH, ALLEN and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.
745 So. 2d 1114 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1999) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was facially sufficient and not conclusively refuted by the record, requiring an evidentiary hearing.


Facts & Procedural History

The defendant alleged in a rule 3.850 motion that his counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to advise him of his right to testify and by …

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 conclude that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim in the defendant’s rule 3.850 motion is facially sufficient and that the allegations of the motion are not conclusively refuted by the portions of the transcript attached to the trial court’s order summarily denying the motion. Therefore, we reverse for an evidentiary hearing.

The defendant alleged in the motion that he did not receive effective assistance of counsel because he was not advised of his right to testify at trial and because his lawyer failed to call an alibi witness. The motion also contained sufficient allegations to satisfy the prejudice prong of the Strickland, v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) test. Thus, in this case, both prongs of the Strickland test were met as required by Oisorio v. State, 676 So. 2d 1368 (Fla.1996).

The portion of the trial transcript attached to the trial court’s order shows that the defendant knew his lawyer had decided not to call him as a witness, but it does not show that the defendant was advised of his right to testify, or that he understood that he could have elected to testify against his lawyer’s advice. Moreover, the trial court did not attach any record that refutes, or even addresses, the defendant’s claim that counsel failed to call an alibi witness.

BOOTH, ALLEN and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Alwin J. Jacobs v. State, 880 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 2004)
    …a. 4th DCA 2000) (remanding the case for the trial court to either hold a hearing or attach further record excerpts because the exhibits incorporated in the trial court’s order did not conclusively refute the IAC alibi witness claim); Reid v. State, 745 So. 2d 1114, 1114-15 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (finding that the IAC claim was facially sufficient, but that the trial court failed to attach the portion of the record that “refutes, or even addresses, the defendant’s claim that counsel failed to call an alibi witnes…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw