Cook v. State

825 So. 2d 508, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12934, 2002 WL 2030427
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cook v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 816 So. 2d 773
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 6, 2002·No. No. 2D02-1928·Published

Opinion

FULMER, Judge.

Christopher Cook timely appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850. Cook raised four claims for relief. Because his first claim was facially sufficient and not refuted by any record attachments, we reverse. As to the other three claims, we affirm the denial of relief without discussion.

Cook was tried for three counts of lewd sexual battery on a child under the age of sixteen, and he was convicted of two counts. In his first claim, Cook alleged that defense counsel failed to communicate a plea offer by the State. He further alleged that he would have accepted the plea offer and that his sentence would have been less. These allegations are facially sufficient to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. See Cottle v. State, 733 So.2d 963, 969 (Fla.1999). Although unartfully stated, Cook alleged that the State offered a plea to a single count and that if Cook had known about and accepted the offer, the. State would have been foreclosed from charging additional counts. Because Cook’s motion alleged a facially sufficient claim, we reverse. On remand, unless the claim is conclusively refuted by the record, an evidentiary hearing will be necessary.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.

DAVIS and COVINGTON, JJ., concur.

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

Cook v. State, 825 So. 2d 508, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12934, 2002 WL 2030427 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

825 So. 2d 508 (Cook v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cottle v. State
24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 166 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)