Winfrey v. State

226 So. 3d 897, 2017 WL 3616400
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 23, 2017
DocketNo. 4D16-4140
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

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

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

Related

JAMES M. LECLAIRE v. STATE OF FLORIDA
247 So. 3d 678 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 So. 3d 897, 2017 WL 3616400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winfrey-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.