Toro v. State

833 So. 2d 876, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 79, 2003 WL 43365
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 8, 2003
DocketNo. 2D00-4387
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 833 So. 2d 876 (Toro 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
Toro v. State, 833 So. 2d 876, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 79, 2003 WL 43365 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

BLUE, Chief Judge.

Danny Toro appeals the denial of his postconviction relief motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We affirm the summary denial of five of the six claims presented in Toro’s motion. The remaining claim was denied following an evidentiary hearing. Because counsel should have been appointed to represent Toro at the evidentiary hearing, we re[877]*877verse the order denying the claim presented in ground three and remand for appointment of counsel and a new eviden-tiary hearing. See Lee v. State, 801 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.

SALCINES and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.

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

Related

Jackson v. State
908 So. 2d 1183 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
833 So. 2d 876, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 79, 2003 WL 43365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toro-v-state-fladistctapp-2003.