ROBERT H. HARRIS
v.
STATE
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.
A postconviction relief motion cannot be summarily denied when the record does not conclusively refute sufficiently pled claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding an alibi instruction or advice on the right to testify.
[1] A postconviction relief motion must be granted an evidentiary hearing unless the motion, files, and records conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief or the…
[2] Ineffective assistance of counsel claims based on failure to request an alibi instruction may warrant reversal and remand if the record does not conclusively refute the c…
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“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.”
Court's statement of the applicable standard for postconviction relief proceedings, citing Freeman v. State.
Robert Harris filed a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 raising eight grounds, including claims that 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 Alibi Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Robert Harris appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm as to Grounds Two, Four, Five, Six, Seven, and Eight. However, because the record does not conclusively refute Harris’s sufficiently pled claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to ask for an alibi instruction, we reverse the summary denial of Ground One and remand for attachment of portions of the record conclusively refuting this claim or for an evidentiary hearing. See Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055, 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))). We also reverse the summary denial of Ground Three, regarding counsel’s alleged misleading advice on Harris’s right to testify, and remand for an evidentiary hearing. Simon v. State, 47 So. 3d 883, 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (concluding evidentiary hearing is usually necessary to determine whether counsel’s advice not to testify is deficient).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
BERGER, LAMBERT and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2000)
- Krishna Maharaj v. State, 684 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1996)
- Clandyve Simon v. State, 47 So. 3d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)