Waddell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Waddell v. State

266 So. 3d 267

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 15, 2019

DocketCase No. 5D18-3373

StatusPublished

This text of 266 So. 3d 267 (Waddell 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

Waddell v. State, 266 So. 3d 267 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Freddy Dwane Waddell appeals the summary denial of his amended motion for postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, wherein he alleged his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to disqualify the trial court on the basis that the trial court had prejudged his case. Specifically, Waddell claimed that the trial court informed him at a pretrial hearing, during which he rejected the State's plea deal, that if he proceeded to trial and lost, he would receive the maximum sentence. According to Waddell, those words proved prophetic. In denying the Motion, the trial court stated, "[a] review of the records shows no such statements made by the Court." The trial court, however, declined to share those records with us. Accordingly, because the record does not conclusively refute Waddell's claim, we reverse the summary denial and remand for attachment of portions of the record conclusively refuting his claim or for an evidentiary hearing. See Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1061 (Fla. 2000) ("[A] defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief motion unless (1) the motion, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, or (2) the motion or a particular *268claim is legally insufficient." (citing Maharaj v. State, 684 So.2d 726 (Fla. 1996) ) ).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COHEN, BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Freddy Dwane Waddell appeals the summary denial of his amended motion for postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, wherein he alleged his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to disqualify the trial court on the basis that the trial court had prejudged his case. Specifically, Waddell claimed that the trial court informed him at a pretrial hearing, during which he rejected the State's plea deal, that if he proceeded to trial and lost, he would receive the maximum sentence. According to Waddell, those words proved prophetic. In denying the Motion, the trial court stated, "[a] review of the records shows no such statements made by the Court." The trial court, however, declined to share those records with us. Accordingly, because the record does not conclusively refute Waddell's claim, we reverse the summary denial and remand for attachment of portions of the record conclusively refuting his claim or for an evidentiary hearing. See Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1061 (Fla. 2000) ("[A] defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief motion unless (1) the motion, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, or (2) the motion or a particular *268claim is legally insufficient." (citing Maharaj v. State, 684 So.2d 726 (Fla. 1996) ) ).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COHEN, BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 So. 3d 267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waddell-v-state-fladistctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack