McClendon v. State
861 So. 2d 1213, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18746, 2003 WL 22900458
Opinion
Affirmed. See Alexander v. State, 830 So.2d 899 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Camille v. State, 803 So.2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). As this court did in Alexander, 830 So.2d at 899-900, we certify the same question of great public importance, to wit:
WHETHER ALLEGATIONS OF AFFIRMATIVE MISADVICE BY TRIAL COUNSEL ON THE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES OF A DEFENDANT’S PLEA FOR FUTURE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IN AN OTHERWISE FACIALLY SUFFICIENT MOTION ARE COGNIZABLE AS AN INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL CLAIM.
Affirmed; question certified.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
McClendon v. State, 861 So. 2d 1213, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18746, 2003 WL 22900458 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).
861 So. 2d 1213 (McClendon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Alexander v. State
830 So. 2d 899 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Camille v. State
803 So. 2d 910 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)