LAMONTAQUE GILYARD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Lamontaque Gilyard, appeals the denial of various postconviction claims. We affirm without discussion all but one claim. In appellant’s second claim, he alleges his defense counsel was ineffective for failing to file a legally sufficient motion for a new trial. The trial court failed to address this claim. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to either attach portions of the record conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim, or for an evidentiary hearing. See Parker v. Dugger, 660 So. 2d 1386, 1389 (Fla.1995) (“We will not rule upon the merits of those claims when the trial court never reached the merits below”).
DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
B.C. v. Fla. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 887 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 2004)…ly, the Second District, relying on its decisions in AW. and J.D.C., again reversed a termination order, holding that the remaining incarceration did not constitute a substantial portion of the time before the child turns eighteen. See In re E.I.F., 872 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). The Certified Conflict Issue The certified conflict issue of whether section 39.806(l)(d)(l) is solely forward-looking or instead encompasses the entire period of incarceration presents a question of statutory construction. Thi…
-
In the Interest of N.S. and D.S. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 898 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…detrimental to those children, it does not support the trial court’s finding of clear and convincing evidence that the Mother’s involvement with the twins would be harmful to them. See, e.g., J.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs. (In re E.I.F.), 872 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). The Department also alleged that the Mother and Father engaged in conduct toward the twins that threatened their welfare. As to the Mother, the alleged harmful conduct all stemmed from behavior she engaged in while pregnant with…
-
In the Interest of S.H. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. & Sally Fulp ad Litem, 992 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…ncarceration did not constitute clear and convincing evidence of incarceration for a “substantial portion of time” before the child, then eight months old, reached the age of majority. J.H. v. Dep’t [*318] of Children & Family Servs. (In re E.I.F.), 872 So. 2d 924, 928 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Similarly, S.H.’s remaining term of incarceration cannot be the basis for termination under section 39.806(l)(d)(l). Accordingly, we must reverse the trial court’s order terminating S.H.’s parental rights. Reversed. CASA…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Parker v. Dugger, 660 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. 1995)