Villavicencio v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Villavicencio v. State

686 So. 2d 785, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 214, 1997 WL 20750

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 22, 1997

DocketNo. 95-2066

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 686 So. 2d 785 (Villavicencio 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

Villavicencio v. State, 686 So. 2d 785, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 214, 1997 WL 20750 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On review of the denial of the appellant’s application for 3.850 relief from his judgment and sentence, we have concluded that the record is insufficient to support the rejection of the claim that, under the circumstances, his counsel was constitutionally deficient in failing timely to press for his discharge on speedy trial grounds. See Genden v. Fuller, 648 So.2d 1183 (Fla.1994); State v. Agee, 622 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993); Zabrani v. Cowart, 506 So.2d 1035 (Fla.1987), overruled, State v. Agee, 622 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993); Bloom v. McKnight, 502 So.2d 422 (Fla.1987), overruled, State v. Agee, 622 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993); State v. Dorian, 619 So.2d 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), quashed, 642 So.2d 1359 (Fla.1994); Williams v. Shapiro, 575 So.2d 1368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). See generally Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Bottoson v. Singletary, 685 So.2d 1302 (Fla.1997); Cox v. State, 407 So.2d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 415 So.2d 1359 (Fla.1982); Blatch v. State, 389 So.2d 669, 672-73 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The cause is remanded for determination of this issue after a frill evidentiary hearing.

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

PER CURIAM.

On review of the denial of the appellant’s application for 3.850 relief from his judgment and sentence, we have concluded that the record is insufficient to support the rejection of the claim that, under the circumstances, his counsel was constitutionally deficient in failing timely to press for his discharge on speedy trial grounds. See Genden v. Fuller, 648 So.2d 1183 (Fla.1994); State v. Agee, 622 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993); Zabrani v. Cowart, 506 So.2d 1035 (Fla.1987), overruled, State v. Agee, 622 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993); Bloom v. McKnight, 502 So.2d 422 (Fla.1987), overruled, State v. Agee, 622 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993); State v. Dorian, 619 So.2d 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), quashed, 642 So.2d 1359 (Fla.1994); Williams v. Shapiro, 575 So.2d 1368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). See generally Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Bottoson v. Singletary, 685 So.2d 1302 (Fla.1997); Cox v. State, 407 So.2d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 415 So.2d 1359 (Fla.1982); Blatch v. State, 389 So.2d 669, 672-73 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The cause is remanded for determination of this issue after a frill evidentiary hearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

686 So. 2d 785, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 214, 1997 WL 20750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/villavicencio-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack