Styron v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Styron v. State

693 So. 2d 1144, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5668, 1997 WL 274807

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 27, 1997

DocketNo. 96-4459

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 693 So. 2d 1144 (Styron 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

Styron v. State, 693 So. 2d 1144, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5668, 1997 WL 274807 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the order by which the trial court summarily denied his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. One of the appellant’s claims was that he would not have pled to the offenses but for his trial attorney’s promise that his convictions would be reversed on appeal. He further alleged that, notwithstanding his trial attorney’s promise, his convictions were affirmed on appeal. Because this was a facially sufficient claim that was not refuted by the attachments to the order, we reverse the order to the extent that it reflects a denial of this claim, and we remand the case to the trial court. The trial [1145]*1145court should either attach that portion of the files and records in the case that conclusively shows that the appellant is entitled to no relief on the claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing on the claim. The order is otherwise affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

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 order by which the trial court summarily denied his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. One of the appellant’s claims was that he would not have pled to the offenses but for his trial attorney’s promise that his convictions would be reversed on appeal. He further alleged that, notwithstanding his trial attorney’s promise, his convictions were affirmed on appeal. Because this was a facially sufficient claim that was not refuted by the attachments to the order, we reverse the order to the extent that it reflects a denial of this claim, and we remand the case to the trial court. The trial [1145]*1145court should either attach that portion of the files and records in the case that conclusively shows that the appellant is entitled to no relief on the claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing on the claim. The order is otherwise affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

693 So. 2d 1144, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5668, 1997 WL 274807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/styron-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack