SHAUNTE COLLINS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court reversed the summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief, finding that the defendant's speedy trial ineffective assistance claim was legally sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing, while affirming the denial of the concession-of-guilt claim.
A defendant's allegation that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to assert speedy trial rights is legally sufficient to require an evidentiary hearing under Rule 3.850.
[1] An allegation that trial counsel failed to assert speedy trial rights states a legally sufficient claim for ineffective assistance of counsel requiring an evidentiary hea…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Collins filed a post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel based on trial counsel's failure to assert speedy trial ri…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Concession Of Guilt cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court summarily denied appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Appellant alleged ineffective assistance of counsel based on trial counsel’s failure to assert his speedy trial rights, and that counsel was ineffective for “conceding” guilt to lesser included offenses. We find appellant’s allegations concerning his speedy trial claim legally sufficient to warrant further examination. See Hankins v. State, 677 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
As to the concession of guilt claim, if counsel had conceded guilt of the lesser included offense, an evidentiary hearing would be required. Having reviewed the portion of the closing arguments provided by appellant, it is clear that counsel was not conceding guilt of any of the lesser included offenses. See McMillan v. State, 763 So. 2d 1140, 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Rather, counsel argued that appellant hoped that the jury would consider the lesser included offenses as appellant did not expect to be found not guilty of everything. Therefore, the trial court was correct in denying this ineffective assistance claim.
We reverse and remand this cause to the trial court with instructions to either conduct an evidentiary hearing or to attach those parts of the record showing that appellant is not entitled to relief with respect to his speedy trial claim.
GUNTHER, WARNER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- McMILLAN v. State, 763 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Lucious Hankins, Jr. v. State, 677 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Pierre v. State, 677 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)