Comacho v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Comacho v. State

813 So. 2d 198, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3917, 2002 WL 459128

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 27, 2002

DocketNo. 2D02-81

StatusPublished

This text of 813 So. 2d 198 (Comacho 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

Comacho v. State, 813 So. 2d 198, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3917, 2002 WL 459128 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

COVINGTON, Judge.

Danni Comacho appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Comacho was charged with trafficking in twenty-eight grams or more of heroin under section 893.135(l)(c), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996). At trial, conflicting evidence was presented regarding the amount of heroin that Co-macho possessed. In accordance with State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla.1991), and Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (97-1), 697 So.2d 84, 89 (Fla.1997), the trial court should have instructed the jury on trafficking in lesser amounts of heroin, but the trial court believed that Comacho was not entitled to this instruction.

Comacho alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to the [199]*199trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on trafficking in amounts less than twenty-eight grams. Comacho has made a facially sufficient claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We reverse and remand on this claim and affirm the remaining claims without comment. On remand, the trial court must either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach record documents that conclusively refute Comacho’s claim.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

STRINGER, J., and THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge, Concur.

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

COVINGTON, Judge.

Danni Comacho appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Comacho was charged with trafficking in twenty-eight grams or more of heroin under section 893.135(l)(c), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996). At trial, conflicting evidence was presented regarding the amount of heroin that Co-macho possessed. In accordance with State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla.1991), and Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (97-1), 697 So.2d 84, 89 (Fla.1997), the trial court should have instructed the jury on trafficking in lesser amounts of heroin, but the trial court believed that Comacho was not entitled to this instruction.

Comacho alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to the [199]*199trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on trafficking in amounts less than twenty-eight grams. Comacho has made a facially sufficient claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We reverse and remand on this claim and affirm the remaining claims without comment. On remand, the trial court must either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach record documents that conclusively refute Comacho’s claim.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

STRINGER, J., and THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge, Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

813 So. 2d 198, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3917, 2002 WL 459128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/comacho-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack