NOTABLE FIRM CASES
Below is a sampling of written opinions from cases handled by the firm. Click on each box to review the complete written opinions.
Dames v. State, 807 So.2d 756 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2002)- Ineffective Assistance of Counsel – first degree murder conviction vacated and new trial granted based upon ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
Battle v. State, 710 So.2d 628 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1998) – Resentencing due to Improper Habitual Felony Offender Sentence – habitual felony offender sentence for violation of probation reversed and remanded for non-habitual sentencing.
Mitchell v. State, 734 So.2d 1067 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel – trial counsel can be ineffective for failure to argue boarded-up structure is not a “dwelling” for purposes of arson statute.
Williams v. State, 777 So.2d 947 (Fla. 2000) – Right to Belated Postconviction Motion – if postconviction counsel fails to timely file Rule 3.850 motion, defendant has right to file belated 3.850.
Graff v. State, 846 So.2d 582 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2003) - Ineffective Assistance of Counsel/Misadvice Regarding Sentence - attorney’s misadvice as to the potential sentence client can receive can amount to ineffective assistance of counsel sufficient to justify withdrawal of plea.
Caban v. State, 9 So.3d 50 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Shaken Baby Syndrome Case – trial counsel can be ineffective for failing to object to improper impeachment of defense expert witness.
Thompson v. State, 987 So.2d 727 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) - Reversal of Life Sentences and Resentencing- when consecutive life sentences for murder and burglary were changed, on motion to correct illegal sentence, to remove habitual felony offender designations, defendant was entitled to a de novo sentencing hearing.
Ivey v. State, 775 So.2d 306 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1999) - Involuntary Plea - A criminal defendant’s guilty plea is involuntary if it is induced by defense counsel's promises which are not fulfilled.
Jones v. State, 787 So.2d 35 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2001) – Jurisdiction of Trial Court to Consider 3.850 Motion - Appeal of postconviction relief matter will not deprive trial court of jurisdiction to consider second postconviction relief motion so long as issues raised in two motions are unrelated.
Ellis v. State, 907 So.2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) – Improper Summary Denial of 3.850 Reversed - Portions of record attached to summary denial of motion for postconviction relief failed to conclusively refute defendant’s allegations that he was promised a sentence at the bottom of the sentencing guidelines range for the offenses to which he pled guilty, and that his sentencing guidelines scoresheet reflected a lowest permissible prison sentence of 66 months, rather than the eight years to which he was sentenced, requiring remand for the attachment of additional portions of the record or an evidentiary hearing
Fabian v. State, 932 So.2d 645 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) – Involuntary Plea due to Belief that Sentence would be Concurrent with Another Sentence - Movant was entitled to hearing, or to attachment of record, on his motion to vacate plea disposing of violation of probation charges, where movant alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise sentencing court of its authority to run movant’s 15-year statutory maximum sentence concurrent with an existing sentence, that he entered plea based upon his impression that existing sentence provided for concurrent sentencing, and that sentencing court believed it lacked authority to impose concurrent sentence.
Sult v. State, 42 So.3d 867 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2010) – Illegal Sentence –Defendant’s motion to correct illegal sentence, which alleged that his consecutive habitual felony offender sentences for burglary of a dwelling and other offenses was illegal, was not procedurally barred as successive, and thus defendant was entitled to relief if the record showed that the subject offenses occurred in a single criminal episode, even though issue was raised in two prior postconviction motions; first postconviction motion raising the issue was denied as untimely and second as successive, and intervening caselaw extended the time to raise the issue such that the first motion was rendered timely.
Goldman v. State, 171 So. 3d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) – Newly Discovered Evidence- claim of newly discovered evidence not conclusively refuted by the record. Reverse and remand for evidentiary hearing on claim of an unconveyed plea offer.