Harper v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Harper v. State

651 So. 2d 823, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2557, 1995 WL 106331

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Harper v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 632 So. 2d 104 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 15, 1995·No. No. 94-1178·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s motion for relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We remand for an evidentiary hearing or record attachments which show that appellant is entitled to no relief on his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to secure and interview a key defense witness, Lionel Williams, who would have testified he had no dominion or control over the cocaine. We affirm in all other respects.

STONE, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s motion for relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We remand for an evidentiary hearing or record attachments which show that appellant is entitled to no relief on his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to secure and interview a key defense witness, Lionel Williams, who would have testified he had no dominion or control over the cocaine. We affirm in all other respects.

STONE, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Harper v. State, 651 So. 2d 823, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2557, 1995 WL 106331 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

651 So. 2d 823 (Harper v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.