Sobel v. State

527 So. 2d 855, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1359, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2358, 1988 WL 56582
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 8, 1988
DocketNo. 88-0190
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 527 So. 2d 855 (Sobel 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
Sobel v. State, 527 So. 2d 855, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1359, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2358, 1988 WL 56582 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order, summarily denying appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief. We reverse and remand.

The dissent in Sobel v. State, 437 So.2d 144 (Fla.1983), spelled out originally what allegedly occurred here. In our view appellant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing upon her sworn, forty-four page motion. Knight v. State, 394 So.2d 997 (Fla.1981). Upon remand, counsel shall be appointed to represent appellant in the trial court. Appellate counsel is unnecessary for the current review.

HERSEY, C.J., and LETTS and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

D'AMICO v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
527 So. 2d 855 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
527 So. 2d 855, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1359, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2358, 1988 WL 56582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sobel-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.