Ortiz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ortiz v. State

807 So. 2d 755, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1414, 2002 WL 215328

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 13, 2002

DocketNo. 4D01-3393

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 807 So. 2d 755 (Ortiz 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

Ortiz v. State, 807 So. 2d 755, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1414, 2002 WL 215328 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the summary denial of Appellant’s rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief as to one of its multiple claims.

Appellant asserts in ground four that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to a departure sentence entered without written reasons. The order does not include or attach portions of the record conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to relief.

Appellant’s allegation that his attorney was ineffective, for failing to object to a departure sentence not accompanied by written reasons, is legally sufficient. See Moore v. State, 747 So.2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

Therefore, as to this ground, we reverse with direction to the trial court to either attach portions of the record refuting Appellant’s claim or to hold an evidentiary hearing. In all other respects, the order is affirmed.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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