Core v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Core v. State

685 So. 2d 91, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 56, 1997 WL 1572

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 2, 1997

DocketNo. 96-2754

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 685 So. 2d 91 (Core 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

Core v. State, 685 So. 2d 91, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 56, 1997 WL 1572 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s postrconviction motion was denied without evidentiary hearing or identification of evidence in the record that refuted his claims. The state has attempted to cure the record deficiency on appeal by supplying this court with documentation to support the decision below. This is insufficient to cure the error. Wheeler v. State, 634 So.2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Jackson v. State, 602 So.2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

We reverse as to the issue of the public defender’s disqualification and remand for an evidentiary hearing or for record attachments refuting appellant’s claim that the office had a conflict caused by its previous representation of a state witness.' We affirm the denial of relief on all remaining issues.

GLICKSTEIN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s postrconviction motion was denied without evidentiary hearing or identification of evidence in the record that refuted his claims. The state has attempted to cure the record deficiency on appeal by supplying this court with documentation to support the decision below. This is insufficient to cure the error. Wheeler v. State, 634 So.2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Jackson v. State, 602 So.2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

We reverse as to the issue of the public defender’s disqualification and remand for an evidentiary hearing or for record attachments refuting appellant’s claim that the office had a conflict caused by its previous representation of a state witness.' We affirm the denial of relief on all remaining issues.

GLICKSTEIN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

685 So. 2d 91, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 56, 1997 WL 1572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/core-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack