Dunn v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dunn v. State

577 So. 2d 692, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3815, 1991 WL 46829

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 9, 1991

DocketNo. 90-02214

StatusPublished

This text of 577 So. 2d 692 (Dunn 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

Dunn v. State, 577 So. 2d 692, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3815, 1991 WL 46829 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from the summary denial of appellant’s motion for postconviction relief under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Appellant asserts that: (1) he was denied effective assistance of counsel; (2) his plea was not freely and voluntarily entered, as he was under the influence of medication at the time he entered his plea; and (3) the trial erred m refusing to allow him to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing.

The trial court summarily denied the motion but failed to attach those portions of the record which support the grounds for denial. See Stinyard v. State, 476 So.2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and Vann v. State, 561 So.2d 21 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We therefore reverse and remand the trial court’s order for proceedings consistent herewith.

BOOTH, SMITH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from the summary denial of appellant’s motion for postconviction relief under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Appellant asserts that: (1) he was denied effective assistance of counsel; (2) his plea was not freely and voluntarily entered, as he was under the influence of medication at the time he entered his plea; and (3) the trial erred m refusing to allow him to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing.

The trial court summarily denied the motion but failed to attach those portions of the record which support the grounds for denial. See Stinyard v. State, 476 So.2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and Vann v. State, 561 So.2d 21 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We therefore reverse and remand the trial court’s order for proceedings consistent herewith.

BOOTH, SMITH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

577 So. 2d 692, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3815, 1991 WL 46829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunn-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack