Prater v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Prater v. State

695 So. 2d 1312, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7580, 1997 WL 361467

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 2, 1997

DocketNo. 96-2883

StatusPublished

This text of 695 So. 2d 1312 (Prater 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

Prater v. State, 695 So. 2d 1312, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7580, 1997 WL 361467 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We affirm the appealed order except as to the claims that counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate or present an intoxication defense, and in misadvising the appellant as to the consequences of rejecting a plea offer and proceeding to trial. These claims were accompanied by detailed factual recitations so as to be facially sufficient. The appealed order is therefore reversed as to the summary denial of these claims, and the case is remanded. On remand, the trial court should either conduct a hearing as to these claims or attach to a new order of summary denial a copy of that portion of the files and records of the trial court that conclusively shows that the appellant is entitled to no relief on these claims.

MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We affirm the appealed order except as to the claims that counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate or present an intoxication defense, and in misadvising the appellant as to the consequences of rejecting a plea offer and proceeding to trial. These claims were accompanied by detailed factual recitations so as to be facially sufficient. The appealed order is therefore reversed as to the summary denial of these claims, and the case is remanded. On remand, the trial court should either conduct a hearing as to these claims or attach to a new order of summary denial a copy of that portion of the files and records of the trial court that conclusively shows that the appellant is entitled to no relief on these claims.

MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

695 So. 2d 1312, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7580, 1997 WL 361467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prater-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.