Houston v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Houston v. State

432 So. 2d 56, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21504

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 17, 1983

DocketNo. AP-214

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 432 So. 2d 56 (Houston 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

Houston v. State, 432 So. 2d 56, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21504 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Houston appeals an otder summarily denying his motion for post-conviction relief, which alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to object to the prosecutor’s comments on Houston’s right to remain silent. We view this allegation as a serious one, requiring further inquiry, because the trial court must grant a mistrial if one is sought after comment on a defendant’s right to remain silent and failure to grant a mistrial is automatically reversible. Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla.1978). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for attachment of portions of the record and file conclusively refuting this allegation or an evidentiary hearing. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. The trial court need not address any of Houston’s other allegations.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., and LARRY G. SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Houston appeals an otder summarily denying his motion for post-conviction relief, which alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to object to the prosecutor’s comments on Houston’s right to remain silent. We view this allegation as a serious one, requiring further inquiry, because the trial court must grant a mistrial if one is sought after comment on a defendant’s right to remain silent and failure to grant a mistrial is automatically reversible. Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla.1978). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for attachment of portions of the record and file conclusively refuting this allegation or an evidentiary hearing. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. The trial court need not address any of Houston’s other allegations.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., and LARRY G. SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

432 So. 2d 56, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houston-v-state-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack