Harris v. State
912 So. 2d 1254, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17044, 2005 WL 2807359
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Harris v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 845 So. 2d 329 →
Opinion
Affirmed. See Bolender v. State, 658 So.2d 82 (Fla.1995); Alexander v. State, 830 So.2d 899 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). As this court did in Alexander, we certify the same question of great public importance:
ARE ALLEGATIONS OF AFFIRMATIVE MISADVICE BY TRIAL COUNSEL ABOUT THE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES OF A DEFENDANT’S PLEA FOR FUTURE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IN AN OTHERWISE FACIALLY SUFFICIENT MOTION COGNIZABLE AS AN INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL CLAIM?
Affirmed; question certified.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harris v. State, 912 So. 2d 1254, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17044, 2005 WL 2807359 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).
912 So. 2d 1254 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Alexander v. State
830 So. 2d 899 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Bolender v. State
658 So. 2d 82 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)
Brown v. State
827 So. 2d 1054 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)