Hylleberg v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hylleberg v. State

700 So. 2d 807, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12222, 1997 WL 677285

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 31, 1997

DocketNo. 97-1824

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 700 So. 2d 807 (Hylleberg 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

Hylleberg v. State, 700 So. 2d 807, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12222, 1997 WL 677285 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

GOSHORN, Judge.

Robert Hylleberg, Jr. appeals from the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion. We find merit only in his contention that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for misadvising him that voluntary intoxication is not a defense to murder or kidnapping.

This court recently noted in Stevens v. State, 693 So.2d 144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) that voluntary intoxication is a defense to the specific intent crime of first-degree murder. See also State v. Bias, 653 So.2d 380 (Fla.1995); Gardner v. State, 480 So.2d 91 (Fla.1985). Voluntary intoxication is also a defense to kidnapping. See Sochor v. State, 619 So.2d 285 (Fla.1993); Worden v. State, 688 So.2d 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

Because the record does not refute Hylle-berg’s allegation, an evidentiary hearing is required on this issue.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur.

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