Auflick v. State
158 So. 2d 767
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 18, 1963·No. No. 4255·Published·Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
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] The 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Auflick v. State, 158 So. 2d 767 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).
158 So. 2d 767 (Auflick v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
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)