LAURENT AJUSTE, 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 held that allegations of attorney fraud on the court, if not conclusively refuted by the record, are legally sufficient to state a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Appellant alleged his attorney committed fraud on the court by falsely representing to the court that he had spoken with an alibi witness. Based on th…
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 Fraud On The Court cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for postcon-viction relief. Because the allegations that his attorney lied to the court are not conclusively refuted in the record, we reverse.
In ground 2(b) of appellant’s motion he stated, under penalty of perjury, that his attorney “committed fraud on the court when ... he told the court that he had just phoned and spoken with [appellant’s alibi witness] but her recollection was [that] she had no idea what time [she dropped appellant off on the night of the crime.]” Based upon his counsel’s representations that he had spoken to the witness, and the witness essentially could not confirm the alibi, appellant elected not to call her as a witness. Appellant states in his motion that his counsel never contacted the witness and lied to the court about contacting her during the trial. Nothing in the record conclusively refutes this sworn allegation. Together with the allegations of the substance of her testimony, we conclude that it is legally sufficient to state a claim of ineffective assistance. See Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004).
When reviewing the trial court’s summary denial of a postconviction motion filed under rule 3.850, this court “must accept the defendant’s factual allegations as true to the extent they are not refuted by the record.” Occhicone v. State, 768 So.2d 1037, 1041 (Fla.2000). If the allegations are facially sufficient, the trial court “must either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach to its order excerpts from the record that conclusively disprove the appellant’s claim.” Palmer v. State, 683 So.2d 678, 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
Because appellant’s claim is not , conclusively refuted by the attachments in the record, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing. As to all other grounds raised in appellant’s motion, we affirm.
STEVENSON, J., concurs.
POLEN, J., dissents without opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chamberlain v. State, 44 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…o. 2d 514, 520 (Fla.2005). “If the allegations are facially sufficient, the trial court ‘must either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach to its order excerpts from the record that conclusively disprove the appellant’s claim.’ ” Ajuste v. State, 12 So. 3d 305, 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (citation omitted). After a thorough review of the defendant’s claims, the orders denying the defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief, as well as the attachments to those orders referenced by the trial court, we concl…
-
Blackledge v. State, 134 So. 3d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…was made with defendant to preclude evidence of the DUI. This statement does not conclusively refute the defendant’s sworn allegations, and the court attached no portions of the record which refuted the defendant’s allegations. See Ajuste v. State, 12 So. 3d 305, 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Nevertheless, the state did submit the probable cause affidavit for the DUI, which the trial court clearly considered and relied on in sentencing the defendant. For this reason, we reverse as to ground two of defendant’s mo…
Authorities Cited
- Occhicone v. State, 768 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 2000)
- Nelson v. State, 875 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 2004)
- Palmer v. State, 683 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)