ERIC WILLIS, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed denial of postconviction relief where trial counsel allegedly misadvised defendant about gain time credits, holding defendant cannot show prejudice because his actual sentence (10 years, 85% minimum) was less than the maximum he expected under the alleged misadvice (9.75 years of 15-year maximum).
A defendant cannot demonstrate prejudice from counsel's alleged misadvice regarding gain time credits when the actual sentence imposed requires serving less time than the defendant would have expected under the misadvised scenario.
[1] A defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on misadvice regarding gain time credits must demonstrate prejudice by showing the actual sentence is more on…
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 intelligenceEric Willis pleaded guilty to charges and was sentenced to 10 years in the Department of Corrections. He claimed his trial counsel misadvised him that…
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 Prejudice Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Eric Willis appeals from the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for postcon-viction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm as to all issues, and write only to address Willis’ claim that his trial counsel misled him as to the amount of time he could spend in prison if he entered a plea to the bench by misadvising him that gain time awards would cause him to serve only 65 percent of any sentence imposed. On appeal, the State essentially concedes error on this point, agreeing with Willis that the record attachments do not conclusively refute the misadvice allegation. However, as found by the trial court, the record attachments do conclusively demonstrate that Willis cannot show prejudice even if he was misadvised as to the lawful gain time accrual rate. As explained in the summary denial order:
[Willis] was clearly aware that he faced a maximum possible penalty of 15 years in the Department of Corrections [if he entered a plea to the bench]. Assuming [Willis’] allegation is true and he believed he would serve only 65% of his prison term, he would expect to serve [up to] 9.75 years [in prison]. However, [Willis] was sentenced to 10 years in the Department of Corrections and must serve at least 85% of his sentence for a term of 8.5 years, which is less than he expected [as a possible term of incarceration upon entering the plea].
We agree with this reasoning.
AFFIRMED.
EVANDER and BERGER, JJ., concur.