DAVID THOMAS PYLANT, 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.
David Pylant appealed the denial of his motion to correct sentence for attempted sexual battery, claiming his counsel misinformed him about how gain time credits would apply to his sentence. The appellate court reversed because the record did not conclusively refute his claim of affirmative misadvice by counsel.
Affirmative misadvice by counsel regarding gain time or actual sentence length is a cognizable basis for postconviction relief, and an evidentiary hearing must be held unless the record conclusively refutes the claim. The plea colloquy and written plea agreement did not conclusively refute Pylant's misadvice claim, so he was entitled to an evidentiary hearing.
[1] Affirmative misadvice by counsel regarding gain time or actual sentence length constitutes a valid basis for postconviction relief.
[2] A defendant's general acknowledgment during a plea colloquy that no promises were made to induce the plea is insufficient to conclusively refute a claim of attorney misad…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Affirmative misadvice by counsel as to gain time or the actual sentence length is a cognizable basis for postconviction relief, and an evidentiary hearing must be held unless the record conclusively refutes the claim.”
Establishes the legal standard for postconviction relief based on counsel misadvice
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePylant pled guilty to attempted sexual battery and was sentenced to ten years in prison followed by ten years of sex offender probation. After violati…
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 Affirmative Misadvice Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
David T. Pylant filed a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because Py-lant sought to withdraw his plea or be resentenced in accordance with his understanding of the plea agreement, the trial court treated his motion as one filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, and summarily denied it. We reverse, as the record does not conclusively refute Pylant’s claim of affirmative misadvice by counsel.
Pylant pled guilty to attempted sexual battery. He was sentenced to ten years in prison followed by ten years of sex offender probation. Following his release from prison, Pylant admitted that he violated probation (VOP), and was sentenced to 140 months in prison, with credit for the time spent in jail after his VOP arrest. The trial court also directed the Department of Corrections (DOC) to compute Pylant’s prison credit. In his postconviction motion, Pylant claimed that his counsel informed him that the State had offered a 140-month sentence recommendation and his prior ten-year sentence, including gain time, would be deducted from his newly-imposed sentence. He alleged that had he been advised that DOC would forfeit his original gain time (547 days), he would not have entered the plea.
Affirmative misadvice by counsel as to gain time or the actual sentence length is a cognizable basis for postconviction relief, and an evidentiary hearing must be held unless the record conclusively refutes the claim. See State v. Leroux, 689 So.2d 235, 236 (Fla.1996). A defendant’s general acknowledgment that no one had made any promises to induce the plea is insufficient to conclusively rebut a misadvice claim. Id. at 237. The plea colloquy in the instant case does not conclusively refute Pylant’s misadvice claim, nor did the written plea make clear that DOC had the discretion to forfeit gain time. If Pylant can prove at an evidentia-ry hearing that he relied on counsel’s erroneous advice that his previous gain time would not be forfeited, then he would be entitled to withdraw the plea.
For these reasons, we reverse the order denying relief and remand the case for an evidentiary hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIFFIN and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 162 So. 3d 1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)…tence he could receive if convicted at trial was the 25-year minimum mandatory sentence and not the 30-year sentence later imposed. Affirmative misadvice by counsel as to gain-time is a cognizable ground for postconviction relief. Pylant v. State, 134 So. 3d 533, 534 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). Mis-advice as to the maximum possible sentence is also a cognizable ground for post-conviction relief. Ferrara v. State, 114 So. 3d 990 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). Our review of the record reveals that these two claims are not con…
-
Jackson v. State, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D958 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…counsel were not insufficient on the face of the motion, the trial court was required to either attach portions of the record conclusively refuting his claims or grant him an evidentiary hearing. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f); cf. Pylant v. State, 134 So. 3d 533, 534 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) ("Affirmative misadvice by counsel as to gain time or the actual sentence length is a cognizable basis for postconviction relief, and an evidentiary hearing must be held unless the record conclusively refutes the claim.").…
-
Roman v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…nce of counsel"). Accordingly, the postconviction court should have attached records to its order which conclusively refuted Mr. Roman's allegation, see Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(5), or set the matter for an evidentiary hearing, see Plyant v. State, 134 So. 3d 533, 534 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) ("Affirmative misadvice by counsel as to . . . the actual sentence length is a cognizable basis for postconviction relief, and an evidentiary hearing must be held unless the record conclusively refutes the claim."). On reman…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Leroux, 689 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1996)