Benavidez v. State
This text of 749 So. 2d 528 (Benavidez 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.
Opinion
Ruben R. BENAVIDEZ, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
*529 PER CURIAM.
Ruben R. Benavidez appeals the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because Benavidez's motion states a facially sufficient claim that is unrebutted by the attachments to the order denying relief, we reverse.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Benavidez entered a no contest plea to a charge of burglary of a dwelling. The State and Benavidez stipulated to a factual basis for the crime. Benavidez now alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective for advising him to plead no contest to a crime that he did not commit and for which no factual basis was established. Benavidez admits that he committed a burglary, but asserts that the building he entered was not a dwelling.
The stipulation to a factual basis for the crime is an inadequate grounds upon which to deny Benavidez's claim. See Farran v. State, 694 So.2d 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). If other documents in the court file, such as police affidavits, substantiate the factual basis for the offense, the court can again summarily deny Benavidez's claim and attach the supporting documents to its order. Otherwise, an evidentiary hearing must be conducted. See id. at 878.
Reversed and remanded.
PARKER, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
749 So. 2d 528, 1999 WL 1222628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benavidez-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.