Melvin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Melvin v. State

141 So. 3d 592, 2014 WL 2100722, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 7636

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 21, 2014

DocketNo. 4D13-4323

StatusPublished

This text of 141 So. 3d 592 (Melvin 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

Melvin v. State, 141 So. 3d 592, 2014 WL 2100722, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 7636 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm without further comment the summary denial of grounds one and two of appellant’s pro se rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We reverse the summary denial as to ground three and remand to the trial court with directions to either hold an evidentiary hearing as to that ground or attach portions of the record, if any exist, refuting the claim that trial counsel acted ineffectively in allowing appellant to plead no contest to a charge not supported by an adequate factual basis. See Harris v. State, 32 So.3d 197 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Silverstein v. State, 985 So.2d 635 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); see also State v. Tucker, 761 So.2d 1248, 1249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (in DWLSR prosecution under section 322.34, actual physical control is an element of the offense); State v. Bostick, 751 So.2d 780, 780 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (same).

[593]*593 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.

DAMOORGIAN, C.J., STEVENSON and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm without further comment the summary denial of grounds one and two of appellant’s pro se rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We reverse the summary denial as to ground three and remand to the trial court with directions to either hold an evidentiary hearing as to that ground or attach portions of the record, if any exist, refuting the claim that trial counsel acted ineffectively in allowing appellant to plead no contest to a charge not supported by an adequate factual basis. See Harris v. State, 32 So.3d 197 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Silverstein v. State, 985 So.2d 635 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); see also State v. Tucker, 761 So.2d 1248, 1249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (in DWLSR prosecution under section 322.34, actual physical control is an element of the offense); State v. Bostick, 751 So.2d 780, 780 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (same).

[593]*593 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.

DAMOORGIAN, C.J., STEVENSON and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 So. 3d 592, 2014 WL 2100722, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 7636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melvin-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack