STORM PATRICK WOOD, 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.
Storm Patrick Wood appeals the summary denial of his post-conviction motion for relief on seven grounds. The court affirmed the denial of six claims but reversed on one ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim regarding trial counsel's failure to retain an accident reconstruction expert, remanding for an evidentiary hearing.
The trial court erred in summarily denying Ground One (ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to retain an accident reconstruction expert) because the record does not conclusively refute this claim and Appellant alleged a facially sufficient claim. The summary denial of the other six grounds was affirmed.
[1] A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires showing that counsel's performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.
[2] A trial court may summarily deny post-conviction relief if the motion, files, and records conclusively establish that the movant is entitled to no relief.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“In order to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Appellant must show that: (1) counsel's performance was deficient, and (2) counsel's deficient performance prejudiced the defense.”
States the two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted of Driving Under the Influence-Manslaughter, Felony Driving While License Suspended or Revoked, and Aggravated Fleeing to Elud…
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 Judgment And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was convicted of Driving Under the Influence-Manslaughter, Felony Driving While License Suspended or Revoked, and Aggravated Fleeing to Elude a Law Enforcement Officer Causing Death. Appellant appeals the lower court’s order summarily denying his Motion for Post-Conviction Relief and to Vacate Judgment and Sentence, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, raising seven grounds for relief. We affirm the lower court’s summary denial of all but one of Appellant’s claims.
In order to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Appellant must show that: (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced the defense. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). A trial court may summarily deny relief without granting an evidentiary hearing if the record conclusively establishes that the defendant is not entitled to relief. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(d) (allowing trial court to summarily deny relief “[i]f the motion, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the movant is entitled to no relief’).
On appeal, Appellant asserts that the trial court erred in summarily denying Ground One of his postconviction motion, as the record did not conclusively refute his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to retain and present an independent accident reconstruction expert. We express no opinion as to the merits of Appellant’s claim, but find that Appellant has alleged a facially sufficient claim under Ground One. We agree with Appellant that the record before us does not conclusively refute this claim. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on this issue. See Brantley v. State, 912 So.2d 342, 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (reversing summary denial of a rule 3.850 motion and remanding for an evidentiary hearing because “we are obligated to reverse ‘unless the record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief ....’”) (emphasis omitted).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for an evidentiary hearing.
LEWIS, C.J., and OSTERHAUS, J„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984)
- Cedrick Brantley v. State, 912 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)