OSCAR THOMAS, 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 appellate court reversed the trial court's summary denial of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim regarding failure to object to testimony, finding the claim facially sufficient and requiring either record attachment or evidentiary hearing.
A trial court may not summarily deny a facially sufficient ineffective assistance of counsel claim without attaching record portions conclusively refuting the allegation or holding an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A trial court must either attach record portions conclusively refuting a facially sufficient ineffective assistance of counsel claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing rat…
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 intelligenceThomas appealed a trial court's order denying his Rule 3.850 motion following a limited evidentiary hearing, challenging the summary denial of his eig…
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 Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant appeals the trial court’s order on his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 following a limited evidentiary hearing. Only one of the appellant’s claims warrants discussion and all other issues are affirmed without further comment. The trial court summarily denied the eighth claim of the appellant’s motion, finding that it constituted an impermissible attack on the sufficiency of the evidence used to convict him. However, as the state concedes, the appellant’s claim was a facially sufficient allegation of ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to object to particular testimony at trial. Therefore, the trial court’s summary denial of the appellant’s facially sufficient claim without attaching record portions conclusively refuting the appellant’s allegation was improper. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(d); Burke v. State, 855 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Accordingly, the trial court’s order as to the appellant’s eighth claim is hereby reversed and the issue is remanded to the trial court for either the attachment of record portions that conclusively refute the appellant’s claim or an evidentiary hearing. As to all other issues, the trial court’s order is affirmed.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.
BENTON, LEWIS and THOMAS, JJ., concur.