Jeromy S. Schiedenhelm v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jeromy S. Schiedenhelm v. State

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 27, 2018

Docket5D17-3504

StatusPublished

This text of Jeromy S. Schiedenhelm v. State (Jeromy S. Schiedenhelm 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

Jeromy S. Schiedenhelm v. State, (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JEROMY STEPHEN SCHIEDENHELM,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D17-3504

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed August 31, 2018

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Citrus County, Richard A. Howard, Judge.

Jeromy Stephen Schiedenhelm, Live Oak, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Jeromy Schiedenhelm, appeals the order denying his motion for

postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, where he

raised eight claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Because Appellant filed a legally

and facially sufficient claim in ground six, and the attachments do not conclusively refute

the claim, we reverse the summary denial of ground six and remand for an evidentiary hearing or for the court to attach portions of the record that conclusively refute the

claim. See Cioeta v. State, 204 So. 3d 156 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). In all other respects,

we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, TORPY, and WALLIS JJ., concur.

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