RAYMOND L. CORNETT, 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 and remanded a summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion because the record did not refute the appellant's allegation that trial counsel failed to advise him of the minimum mandatory sentence he faced.
When a defendant alleges that trial counsel failed to advise of minimum mandatory sentences and the record does not refute this allegation, the trial court must either produce additional record support or hold an evidentiary hearing.
[1] When a defendant alleges ineffective assistance of counsel based on failure to advise of minimum mandatory sentences, the trial court must either supplement the record wi…
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 intelligenceRaymond Cornett entered an open plea of nolo contendere to eight charges and was sentenced to twenty years' probation with the first ten years as a mi…
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
The appellant, Raymond Cornett, timely seeks review of the trial court’s summary denial of his 3.85Ó motion. The appellant entered an open plea of nolo contendere to eight charges. On the first of these charges, appellant was sentenced to a period of twenty years’ probation with a special condition requiring that the' first ten years be served in the Department of Corrections (“DOC”) as a minimum mandatory. He was sentenced to three years’ DOC on the remaining charges, all to run concurrent. The appellant raises numerous issues in his 3.850 motion, one of which requires remand.
The appellant contends that his trial counsel failed to advise him of the minimum mandatory sentence he was facing as a result of the charges against him. The State correctly concedes that the attachments to the plea agreement, plea colloquy, and portions of the sentencing transcript to the trial court’s order do not refute appellant’s allegations in this regard. As a result, the matter is remanded back to the trial court to either attach further portions of the record supporting its ruling or hold an evidentiary hearing on the matter. See Edwards v. State, 888 So.2d 153 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). We note that if the appellant is allowed to withdraw his plea and proceed to trial, he faces the possibility of a life sentence, which is clearly harsher than the minimum sentence he is currently serving. See Guajardo v. State, 1 So.3d 406, 407 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
ORFINGER, C.J., SAWAYA, and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Guajardo v. State, 1 So. 3d 406 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
- Alfonzo Edwards v. State, 888 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Campbell v. Campbell, 888 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)