Cira v. State

780 So. 2d 175, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 326, 2001 WL 43668
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 19, 2001
DocketNo. 2D00-3184
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 780 So. 2d 175 (Cira 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
Cira v. State, 780 So. 2d 175, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 326, 2001 WL 43668 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ismail Cira appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We conclude that the trial court’s order and attachments fail to refute Cira’s first claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel; we reverse on this claim, but in all other respects we affirm the trial court’s order.

Cira was convicted, following a jury trial, of two counts of aggravated assault. He argues that his counsel’s stipulation to entry in evidence of a 9 millimeter gun, a knife, ammunition, and holsters that had nothing to do with the offense he committed, except that they were located in his automobile, was ineffective assistance of counsel. Cira contends the admittance of this irrelevant evidence prejudiced him because the jury would view him as more [176]*176likely to commit the offense charged because he was “gun happy.”. The trial court denied Cica relief because the evidence was discovered due to a valid search warrant.

The admission into evidence of weapons legally owned by Cira that had no connection to the offense may have prejudiced him in the eyes of the jury and thus changed the outcome of the trial. See Johnson v. State, 695 So.2d 441 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Huhn v. State, 511 So.2d 583 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Counsel’s stipulation to the admission may have been error.

Accordingly, we reverse this portion of the trial court’s order and remand to the court for further proceedings. On remand, the trial court shall attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute his claim. Otherwise, it must hold an evidentiary hearing.

Affirmed in part, reversed in-part, and remanded.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT and STRINGER, JJ„ concur.

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

Related

Cira v. Dillinger
903 So. 2d 367 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
780 So. 2d 175, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 326, 2001 WL 43668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cira-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.