CALVIN LAMONT MACK, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CALVIN LAMONT MACK, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
829 So. 2d 346
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2002)
Caution
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The State of Florida concedes that the record does not conclusively refute Calvin Lamont Mack’s claim that his trial counsel failed to inform him of a plea offer. After reviewing the record we agree, reverse the lower court’s order denying post-conviction relief and remand for an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether or not a plea was offered and, if so, whether counsel was ineffective for failing to communicate the offer to the defendant Mack.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Begyn v. State of Fla. Bus. & Prof'l Regulations & Risk Mgmt., 849 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…. Both Farhangi and Capuano were argued in the briefs and fully considered by this court. Appellees also argue that this court overlooked Weather Engineers v. Presgraves, 774 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Dramis v. Palm Beach County School Board, 829 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); and Florida Distillers v. Rudd, 751 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), none of which were previously cited to this court. As stated in Blinn v. Florida Department of Transportation, 781 So. 2d 1103, 1110 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (on reh…
-
Am. Panel Corp. & Royal & Sunalliance v. Smith, 932 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…m work. Contrary to the JCC’s ruling, this court has ruled that a claimant is not barred from seeking indemnity benefits merely because he or she refuses to participate in an E/C’s managed care arrangement. See Dramis v. Palm Beach County Sch. Bd., 829 So. 2d 346, 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). The existence of a managed care arrangement is relevant to a claim for medical treatment, but is not dispositive of a claim for indemnity benefits. Id.; see also Fla. Distillers v. Rudd, 751 So. 2d 754, 757 (Fla. 1st DCA 20…