JOHNNY ANTHONY MARSHALL, 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 reversed summary denial of postconviction relief on ineffective assistance of counsel claims regarding hearsay objections and alibi defense investigation, but affirmed denial on other grounds.
A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on postconviction relief claims when the record does not conclusively refute allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel.
[1] A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief motion unless the motion, files, and records conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no…
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 intelligenceJohnny Anthony Marshall appealed the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion raising six grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel,…
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 Tactical Decisions By Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
Johnny Anthony Marshall appeals the summary denial of his motion for postcon-viction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm as to, Grounds B, D, and E. However, because the record does not conclusively refute Marshall’s claims that counsel was (I)- ineffective for failing to object to the introduction of hearsay by Detective Newton and (2) ineffective for failing to investigate and present an alibi defense, we reverse the summary denial of Grounds A and G and remand for the postconviction court to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting those claims or for an evidentiary hearing.1 See Freeman v. *1084 State, 761 So.2d 1065, 1061 (Fla.2000) (“[A] defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief motion unless (1) the motion, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, or (2) the motion or a particular claim is legally insufficient.” (citing Maharaj v. State, 684 So.2d 726 (Fla.1996))).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
TORPY, BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Krishna Maharaj v. State, 684 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1996)
- Hannon v. State, 941 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 2006)