LARRY EUGENE SMITH, 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 held that a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for preventing a better plea agreement requires the post-conviction court to attach refuting documents or hold a hearing, and claims of trial court error should be raised on direct appeal.
Larry Eugene Smith challenged the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and 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 Conflict-Free Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
Larry Eugene Smith challenges the summary denial of his motion for postcon-viction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Smith raised two claims in his motion. We reverse the denial of claim 1 and remand for further consideration and affirm the denial of claim 2.
Smith was convicted of attempting to introduce contraband into a detention facility, driving under the influence, and driving with a revoked license (habitual traffic offender). He was sentenced to forty-two months’ imprisonment followed by eighteen months’ probation pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement. Smith did not file a motion to withdraw plea or appeal his judgment and sentence.
In his rule 3.850' motion, Smith first argued that trial counsel was ineffective for preventing him from entering into a more favorable plea agreement. The post-conviction court summarily denied this ifiaim, finding it to be without merit. The postconviction court did not, however, attach to its order record documents that conclusively refute Smith’s claim. We therefore reverse the summary denial of claim 1 and remand for the postconviction court to either attach record documents that conclusively refute this claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing on this claim. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f); Forte v. State, 189 So.3d 1043, 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (citing Ciambrone v. State, 128 So.3d 227, 232 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)).
As to Smith’s second claim, he argued that the trial court erred in failing to appoint conflict-free counsel. Because claims of trial court error should be raised on direct appeal, we affirm the summary denial of claim 2. See Steward v. State, 931 So.2d 133, 134 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (citing Sampson v. State, 845 So.2d 271, 272 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
LaROSE and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Leonard v. State, 931 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Thearon Sampson v. State, 845 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Ciambrone v. State, 128 So. 3d 227 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
- Forte v. State, 189 So. 3d 1043 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)