Roth v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Roth v. State

704 So. 2d 547, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4169, 1997 WL 199270

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 23, 1997

DocketNo. 96-2860

StatusPublished

This text of 704 So. 2d 547 (Roth 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

Roth v. State, 704 So. 2d 547, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4169, 1997 WL 199270 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We grant rehearing and substitute the following opinion for the opinion filed February 5,1997.

We reverse the order denying defendant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion as to grounds one and two of defendant’s motion and remand for an evidentiary hearing as the record does not conclusively refute defendant’s allegations as to his attorney’s misadvice concerning gain-time eligibility. State v. Leroux, 689 So.2d 235 (Fla.1996); Booth v. State, 687 So.2d 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). On remand, the court must conduct a hearing “to determine the merits of ... defendant’s claim that he relied in good faith upon the erroneous advice of his attorney in entering a plea.” Leroux, 689 So.2d 235.

We affirm the remaining portions of the order.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

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

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We grant rehearing and substitute the following opinion for the opinion filed February 5,1997.

We reverse the order denying defendant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion as to grounds one and two of defendant’s motion and remand for an evidentiary hearing as the record does not conclusively refute defendant’s allegations as to his attorney’s misadvice concerning gain-time eligibility. State v. Leroux, 689 So.2d 235 (Fla.1996); Booth v. State, 687 So.2d 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). On remand, the court must conduct a hearing “to determine the merits of ... defendant’s claim that he relied in good faith upon the erroneous advice of his attorney in entering a plea.” Leroux, 689 So.2d 235.

We affirm the remaining portions of the order.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

704 So. 2d 547, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4169, 1997 WL 199270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roth-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack