ENRIQUE M. MALESPIN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 the denial of post-conviction relief and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether defense counsel failed to inform the defendant of a one-day deadline for a plea offer, which would constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
A defendant states a legally sufficient claim for ineffective assistance of counsel when alleging his attorney failed to inform him that a plea offer would be withdrawn after one day, requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine if counsel's failure to communicate the deadline prejudiced the defendant.
[1] A defendant states a legally sufficient claim for ineffective assistance of counsel when alleging that counsel failed to communicate the limited availability of a plea of…
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 intelligence“A person induced to give up his right to a trial by a misapprehension of circumstances surrounding his plea is entitled to vacation of any judgment and sentence resulting from such a plea.”
Citing Britt v. State for the principle that misrepresentation regarding plea circumstances entitles a defendant to relief.
Enrique Malespin received a 50-month plea offer from the State that was available for only one day. His attorney failed to inform him of the one-day d…
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.
This is an appeal from the trial court’s denial of defendant Enrique Malespin’s motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Malespin claims he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to inform him that the State’s 50-month plea offer would only be available to him for one day. Malespin failed to accept the offer within the time limit and eventually was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. He alleges that if he had known the offer would be withdrawn m one day, he would have accepted it. Malespin states a legally sufficient claim. See Fla. R. Crim P. 3.171(c)(2)(B); Britt v. State, 352 So. 2d 148, 149 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977) (“A person induced to give up his right to a trial by a misapprehension of circumstances surrounding his plea is entitled to vacation of any judgment and sentence resulting from such a plea.”). See also Cottle v. State, 733 So. 2d 963, 969 (Fla.1999) (“[Cjourts presume prejudice from the inference that a defendant with more, or better, information, would have acted differently.”) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Williams v. State, 326 Md. 367, 605 A. 2d 103, 110 (1992)).
As it is not clear from the face of the record whether the plea offer was open for only one day and, if so, whether counsel told Malespin of the limited availability of the offer, we remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the plea offer would be withdrawn after one day and, if so, whether defendant was informed of this.
We find no merit in Malespin’s other 3.850 claims.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 138 So. 3d 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…t concerning [*512] the sentence he faced, citing Morgan v. State, 991 So. 2d 835 (Fla.2008).1 In his motion for rehearing, Brown emphasized that his factual allegations must be taken as true and they entitled him to relief under Malespin v. State, 873 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). In Malespin, the court reversed the trial court’s summary denial of a post conviction claim that counsel failed to inform defendant that the state’s fifty-month plea offer would be available for only one day. The court found that…
Authorities Cited
- Cottle v. State, 733 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1999)
- Britt v. State, 352 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)