JULIO ALONSO PACHECO
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.
A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a postconviction defendant's request for appointed counsel to present a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel when the defendant lacks the education and ability to present the claim without assistance.
[1] A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a postconviction defendant's request for appointed counsel when the defendant lacks the education and ability to present cl…
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 intelligenceJulio Alonso Pacheco appealed an order denying his postconviction motion alleging six claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. He requested appoin…
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 Postconviction Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
JULIO ALONSO PACHECO,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-818
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed February 7, 2020
3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Jenifer M. Harris, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Kathryn Rollison Radtke, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Nora Hutchinson Hall, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Julio Alonso Pacheco appeals an order denying his postconviction motion alleging six claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. He correctly asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by denying his request to appoint counsel to assist him in presenting Ground Two of his motion. See Havard v. State, 998 So. 2d 676, 677 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)
2 (reversing denial of postconviction counsel where defendant had fourth grade education, was confused and unable to articulate positions, and unable to comply with correct procedures, including subpoenaing of witnesses necessary to prove claims); Woodward v. State, 992 So. 2d 391, 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (reversing denial of counsel for postconviction claims where proof of claims would require introduction of medical records and expert testimony). We affirm, without discussion, the denial of Pacheco’s other claims.
AFFIRMED, in part; REVERSED, in part; and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
EVANDER, C.J., EISNAUGLE and SASSO, JJ., concur.