Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Tolin v. State

Tolin v. State

824 So. 2d 260, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11395, 2002 WL 1828126
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 12, 2002
DocketNo. 1D01-2834
StatusPublished

This text of 824 So. 2d 260 (Tolin 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
Tolin v. State, 824 So. 2d 260, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11395, 2002 WL 1828126 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Major v. State, 814 So.2d 424, 431 (Fla. 2002), bars the appellant’s claim that his counsel failed to advise him of the potential recidivist consequences of his plea. This is not to be confused with our determination that a claim of affirmative mis-advice on the same issue is similarly precluded. See Bates v. State, 818 So.2d 626, (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

AFFIRMED.

MINER, KAHN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Bates v. State
818 So. 2d 626 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Major v. State
814 So. 2d 424 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
824 So. 2d 260, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11395, 2002 WL 1828126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tolin-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.