ORVILLE MAXWELL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Orville Maxwell appeals the denial of his post-conviction relief motion claiming his trial counsel failed to communicate a 10-year plea offer. The court reverses the denial as to this claim and remands for an evidentiary hearing, finding the record does not conclusively refute Maxwell's ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
The court holds that if counsel failed to communicate the 10-year plea offer, this constitutes error. The record does not conclusively refute Maxwell's claim, and therefore he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the ineffective assistance of counsel claim regarding the failure to convey the plea offer.
[1] A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a motion for post-conviction relief unless the motion, files, and records conclusively show the defendant is entitled…
[2] Where the record does not conclusively refute post-conviction claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on those cl…
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“A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a motion for post-conviction relief unless: (1) the motion, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the defendant is entitled to no relief; or (2) the motion or particular claims are legally insufficient.”
Establishes the legal standard for when a defendant must receive an evidentiary hearing on post-conviction relief claims.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMaxwell was charged with attempted premeditated first-degree murder with firearm discharge and aggravated assault with a firearm. Following a jury tri…
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 Plea Offer Communication cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Upon consideration .of the State of Florida’s Motion for Clarification in which the State seeks, clarification on whether Orville Maxwell’s counsel .failed to communicate the 10-year plea offer to Maxwell, we grant the motion and substitute this opinion in place, of this . Court’s previous opinion issued September 2,2015.
Orville Maxwell appeals the summary denial of his 3.850’motion for post-conviction ' relief in which '"he raised various grounds for relief.1 We reverse the denial of relief as to ground four for trial counsel’s failure' to timely convey the State’s plea offer, and remand the case for the trial court to either attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute Maxwell’s claim or to hold an evidentiary hearing. . .
The State charged Maxwell with attempted premeditated first-degree murder with the discharge of a firearm and aggravated assault with a firearm.. Following a jury trial, Maxwell was adjudicated guilty of both counts. He received a sentence of thirty years in prison on the attempted murder charge, with a 25-year minimum- mandatory term, and a concurrent sentence of five years on the aggravated assault charge.1
If counsel failed to communicate the 10-year plea offer to Maxwell, this would constitute error. “A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a motion for post-conviction relief unless: (1) *232the motion, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the defendant is entitled to no relief; or (2) the motion or particular claims are legally insufficient. Lee v. State, 789 So.2d 1176, 1177 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).” “Where the record does not conclusively refute post-conviction claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, the de-fendaht is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on those claims.”' Id. Maxwell specifically alleged in ground four that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he'first heard of the State’s 10-year plea offer at the sentencing hearing. He further alleged that he woüld have otherwise . accepted the 10-year plea offer, which would have resulted in a sentence significantly lower than the thirty years he received,' Furthermore, the record does not conclusively, refute Maxwell’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim that counsel failed to convey the 10-year plea offer.
The trial eóürt thus erroneously concluded that Maxwell'failed to state a colorable claim for relief. We therefore reverse the denial of relief as to ground four for trial counsel’s failure to timely convey the State’s plea offer, and remand the case for the trial court to either attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute Maxwell’s claim or to hold an evidentiary hearing. The denial of relief as to all other grounds raised is affirmed.
Affirmed in part; -reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.