STEPHEN HARRIS, 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 reversed the denial of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim regarding trial counsel's failure to file a motion to suppress evidence based on a girlfriend's authority to consent to police entry, while affirming the denial of remaining claims.
Trial counsel's failure to file a motion to suppress evidence based on a girlfriend's common authority to consent to police entry states a legally sufficient claim for ineffective assistance of counsel requiring further review.
[1] A defendant states a legally sufficient claim for ineffective assistance of counsel when alleging trial counsel failed to file a motion to suppress evidence based on a th…
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 intelligenceThe defendant appealed a circuit court's denial of a Rule 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, claiming trial counsel failed to fi…
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 Fourth Amendment (Search And Seizure) cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant appeals the circuit court’s denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. We reverse for further review of the defendant’s first argument, and affirm without comment as to the remaining arguments.
In his first argument, the defendant alleged that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress evidence. At issue is whether the defen*568dant’s “girlfriend” had common authority to consent to the officers’ entry into the apartment. Cf. Ferguson v. State, 58 So.3d 360 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (the state proved that the defendant’s girlfriend had common authority over the apartment so that her consent for the police to enter the premises validated their presence in the apartment). On this argument, the defendant stated a legally sufficient claim for relief, and the record before this court does not conclusively refute the claim. Accordingly, we reverse as to this claim only. On remand, the trial court shall either attach those portions of the record which conclusively refute the claim or shall conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the defendant’s counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
CIKLIN, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Solar v. State, 264 So. 3d 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Ferguson v. State, 58 So. 3d 360 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)