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

Mayolo v. State

692 So. 2d 939, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3257, 1997 WL 163578
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 9, 1997
DocketNo. 97-0253
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 692 So. 2d 939 (Mayolo 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
Mayolo v. State, 692 So. 2d 939, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3257, 1997 WL 163578 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The record excerpts attached to the order summarily denying David Mayolo’s rule 3.850 motion do not conclusively refute his allegations that the public defender’s office had a conflict due to its prior representation of a state witness and that he was not given prior notice that a fee for the public defender’s services would be assessed. The order denying the motion is reversed and the case is remanded for evidentiary hearing or attachment of additional record excerpts that show that Mayolo is not entitled to any relief on those two issues. We agree with the trial court’s denial of the remainder of his claims.

GLICKSTEIN, STONE and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Hall v. State
784 So. 2d 491 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Gordon v. Sanders
692 So. 2d 939 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
692 So. 2d 939, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3257, 1997 WL 163578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayolo-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.