Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Luke v. State

Luke v. State

833 So. 2d 256, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 19152, 2002 WL 31870347
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 26, 2002
DocketNo. 4D02-985
StatusPublished

This text of 833 So. 2d 256 (Luke 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
Luke v. State, 833 So. 2d 256, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 19152, 2002 WL 31870347 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant entered a no contest plea to a drug possession charge on September 25, 2001. On September 26, he filed a pro se motion to withdraw his plea claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. Among the grounds alleged was the claim that appellant’s trial counsel had “manipulated [him] into pleading no contest.” The trial court denied the motion to vacate the plea without holding an evidentiary hearing. Based on Ventura v. State, 820 So.2d 1026 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), and Simeton v. State, 734 So.2d 446 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), we remand this case for an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea.

SHAHOOD, GROSS, JJ„ and MAASS, ELIZABETH T., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Related

Ventura v. State
820 So. 2d 1026 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Simeton v. State
734 So. 2d 446 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
833 So. 2d 256, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 19152, 2002 WL 31870347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luke-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.