Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Burkett v. State

Burkett v. State

783 So. 2d 333, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 5242, 2001 WL 395332
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 20, 2001·No. No. 1D00-3734·Published

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand this case for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record conclusively refuting the claim that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to inform the appellant that voluntary intoxication was a defense to his robbery charges and the burglary charge in case number 98-1940G. See Richardson v. State, 723 So.2d 910, 911 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Kiser v. State, 678 So.2d 859, 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). See also Thomas v. State, 734 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)(reversing for further proceedings on voluntary intoxication claim even though the appellant pled guilty and indicated in a plea agreement he was satisfied with defense counsel’s performance).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

BENTON and POLSTON, JJ., concur. PADOVANO, J., concurs with opinion.

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

Burkett v. State, 783 So. 2d 333, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 5242, 2001 WL 395332 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

783 So. 2d 333 (Burkett v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Odom v. State
782 So. 2d 510 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Richardson v. State
723 So. 2d 910 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Thomas v. State
734 So. 2d 1138 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Kiser v. State
678 So. 2d 859 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)