Winfrey v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Winfrey v. State

226 So. 3d 897, 2017 WL 3616400

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 23, 2017·No. No. 4D16-4140·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Donnie Winfrey appeals the summary denial of his amended rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The trial court failed to rule on Winfrey’s claim within ground one that counsel failed to advise him, be[898]*898fore he entered an open plea, that the court could impose consecutive sentences. We therefore reverse and remand for the trial court to consider that claim. See, e.g., Hebert v. State, 162 So.3d 64 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). We affirm the denial of Winfrey’s other claims.

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

Damoorgian, Ciklin and Levine, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Donnie Winfrey appeals the summary denial of his amended rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The trial court failed to rule on Winfrey’s claim within ground one that counsel failed to advise him, be[898]*898fore he entered an open plea, that the court could impose consecutive sentences. We therefore reverse and remand for the trial court to consider that claim. See, e.g., Hebert v. State, 162 So.3d 64 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). We affirm the denial of Winfrey’s other claims.

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

Damoorgian, Ciklin and Levine, JJ., concur.

Winfrey v. State, 226 So. 3d 897, 2017 WL 3616400 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

226 So. 3d 897 (Winfrey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related