RICKY LAWRENCE GANT, 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 the trial court's summary denial of postconviction relief, finding that allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding failure to inform the defendant of enhanced sentencing and the strength of the State's case were unrefuted and required an evidentiary hearing.
A trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction claim of ineffective assistance of counsel when the defendant alleges counsel failed to inform him of enhanced sentencing exposure and the strength of the State's case, and these allegations are unrefuted by the record.
[1] When a defendant alleges ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel's failure to inform him of enhanced sentencing exposure and the strength of the State's case,…
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 intelligenceGant was convicted by jury of dealing in stolen property and sentenced to 20 years as a habitual felony offender. He had refused a plea offer of eight…
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 Plea Negotiations cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges an order of the trial court summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
According to the appellant’s allegations, following a jury trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to 20 years as a habitual felony offender on the charge of dealing in stolen property. He alleges that prior to trial he refused a plea offer of eight years in prison on that charge. He further alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to inform him that he faced enhanced sentencing as a habitual felony offender and that the State had an incriminating pawn ticket and the pawn shop owner’s testimony to support the charge should he proceed to trial. He alleges that had he been fully informed of the penalty he faced and the strength of the State’s case, he would have accepted the plea offer and avoided the 20-year habitual felony offender sentence. Because these allegations are unrefuted by the record before us, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of this claim. See Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). On remand, the trial court is directed to either attach record portions conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim, or else hold an evidentiary hearing. We affirm the trial court’s summary denial in all other respects. AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.
BARFIELD, C.J., WOLF and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parks v. State, 814 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…penalty was only a few more years in the DOC than the offer being made by the State. He contends that, had he known he could have been sentenced to thirty years in the DOC, he would have accepted the plea offer made by the State. See Gant v. State, 777 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Lester v. State, 773 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). The trial court denied the claim because appellant acknowledged on the record the plea offer made by the State; that the…
Authorities Cited
- Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)