Auflick v. State

158 So. 2d 767
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 18, 1963
DocketNo. 4255
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 158 So. 2d 767 (Auflick v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Auflick v. State, 158 So. 2d 767 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, seeking post conviction relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 App., failed to allege that he was insolvent and unable to obtain counsel at the time he entered his plea. [768]*768The motion, therefore, was legally insufficient. Savage v. State, Fla.App.1963, 156 So.2d 566. See also Dias v. State, Fla.App., 158 So.2d 766, wherein the court said:

“The right to counsel under the decision in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S.Ct. 792, 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963), extends only to a person who is financially unable to employ counsel.”

Affirmed.

KANNER, Acting C. J., and ALLEN and WHITE, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Roberts v. State
169 So. 2d 43 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1964)
Hoffman v. State
163 So. 2d 797 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1964)
Duke v. State
162 So. 2d 549 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1964)
Auflick v. State
159 So. 2d 646 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
158 So. 2d 767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/auflick-v-state-fladistctapp-1963.