Opinion

Brown v. State

  • 672 So. 2d 661
  • 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4408
  • 1996 WL 218191
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
May 2, 1996
Status
Published
On the bench
Allen, Mickle, Webster
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 48.9%

holding that a remand is required for the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing on the posteonviction motion or to attach to its order denying relief without a hearing the portions of the record establishing conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief

How later courts described this case

  • holding that a remand is required for the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing on the posteonviction motion or to attach to its order denying relief without a hearing the portions of the record establishing conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, an inmate of the state correctional system, seeks review of an order denying his motion, filed pursuant to Florida Rule *662 of Criminal Procedure 3.850, seeking post-conviction relief. In his motion, appellant raised a number of grounds. We affirm the trial court’s denial as to all of the grounds, save one, without discussion. However, as to the remaining ground, we are constrained to reverse.

In his motion, appellant asserted that his trial counsel had been ineffective because, although aware at the time appellant entered pleas of guilty to second-degree murder and armed robbery that appellant had a history of mental illness and was being treated with Thorazine, Elavill and Sinequan while incarcerated awaiting trial, trial counsel did not advise the trial court of those circumstances. Appellant asserted, further, that, as a result of his mental illness and the drugs with which he was being treated, he was confused and unable to comprehend what was taking place, rendering his pleas involuntary. The portions of the record attached to the trial court’s order do not establish conclusively that appellant is entitled to no relief on the basis of these assertions. Accordingly, we reverse as to these assertions only, and remand to the trial court with directions that it either hold an evidentiary hearing, or attach to its order denying relief without a hearing portions of the record which establish conclusively that appellant is entitled to no relief.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.