Bartley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bartley v. State

708 So. 2d 339, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3728, 1998 WL 161248

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 9, 1998

DocketNo. 97-2680

StatusPublished

This text of 708 So. 2d 339 (Bartley 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

Bartley v. State, 708 So. 2d 339, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3728, 1998 WL 161248 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed a motion for post-conviction relief, presenting a challenge to his sentence and a claim that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate and present a voluntary intoxication defense. The trial court denied relief and this court reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Bartley v. State, 689 So.2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). On remand, both claims were again denied and certain attachments were provided. While we agree the sentencing issue is without merit, the trial court found the failure to investigate and present the voluntary intoxication defense was a sound tactical decision by trial counsel. Such a conclusion is generally inappropriate absent an evidentia-ry hearing and we find this case is not an exception to that rule. See Kiser v. State, 678 So.2d 859 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Guisasola v. State, 667 So.2d 248 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

We reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions to conduct an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.

[340]*340MICKLE and DAVIS, JJ., and MeDONALD, PARKER LEE, Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed a motion for post-conviction relief, presenting a challenge to his sentence and a claim that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate and present a voluntary intoxication defense. The trial court denied relief and this court reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Bartley v. State, 689 So.2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). On remand, both claims were again denied and certain attachments were provided. While we agree the sentencing issue is without merit, the trial court found the failure to investigate and present the voluntary intoxication defense was a sound tactical decision by trial counsel. Such a conclusion is generally inappropriate absent an evidentia-ry hearing and we find this case is not an exception to that rule. See Kiser v. State, 678 So.2d 859 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Guisasola v. State, 667 So.2d 248 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

We reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions to conduct an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.

[340]*340MICKLE and DAVIS, JJ., and MeDONALD, PARKER LEE, Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

708 So. 2d 339, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3728, 1998 WL 161248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartley-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack