Foy v. State

939 So. 2d 253, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17195, 2006 WL 2933945
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 16, 2006
DocketNo. 1D06-2260
StatusPublished

This text of 939 So. 2d 253 (Foy 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
Foy v. State, 939 So. 2d 253, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17195, 2006 WL 2933945 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his postconviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because there is insufficient information in the record to refute the appellant’s second and third claims, we reverse. We affirm the remainder of the appellant’s claims without further discussion.

On March 21, 2000, the appellant was convicted of manslaughter by boating under the influence and culpable negligence and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment as a habitual felony offender followed by twenty years’ probation on count one and to time served on count two. In a timely rule 3.850 motion, the appellant raised six claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. In ground two, the appellant alleged that his counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress the statements taken from the appellant on December 13 and 14. In ground three, the appellant alleged that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the withdrawal of the appellant’s blood because the police did not have probable cause to believe that the appellant was operating the boat when the blood withdrawal was made. The trial court summarily denied both of these claims. Because the trial court failed to attach sufficient record portions to support its summary denial, we reverse the denial of these claims and remand for an evidentiary hearing or further attachment of portions of the record to conclusively refute the appellant’s claims. Cobb v. State, 582 So.2d 81 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

KAHN, BENTON, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cobb v. State
582 So. 2d 81 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
939 So. 2d 253, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17195, 2006 WL 2933945, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foy-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.