WILLIAM PRIVETT
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
An ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on failure to call a handwriting expert must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing when the record contains no conclusive evidence refuting the claim.
[1] A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on failure to call an expert witness must proceed to an evidentiary hearing when the appellate record does not conclusi…
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 intelligence“There is nothing in the record before this Court that conclusively refutes the appellant's claims.”
The court's basis for reversing the summary denial and requiring an evidentiary hearing on the handwriting expert claim.
William Privett was convicted in 2011 of lewd and lascivious battery and contributing to the delinquency of a minor following a jury trial in which th…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
In ground two, the appellant alleged that counsel was ineffective for failing to call an expert to testify that the appellant did not write certain notes to the victim. The victim testified that she saw the appellant write the notes in which he allegedly professed his love for the victim and specified a certain sexual act he wanted to engage in with her. He alleges that he did not write the letters and that an expert would be able to confirm as much. He alleges that if an expert had established that he did not write the notes, the victim’s credibility would have been harmed, and her testimony was the only evidence against him. There is nothing in the record before this Court that conclusively refutes the appellant’s claims. Thus, we reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a hearing on the appellant’s claim. AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with directions. RAY, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.