TONY KEARSE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Habitual Offender Enhancement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this post-conviction proceeding, Appellant, who received a 30-year sentence after he pled no contest to Sale of Cocaine, a second degree felony, challenges the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. Appellant claims that his counsel, who had received notice that the State intended to seek felony habitual offender enhancement of his sentence, failed to explain that the effect of the enhancement was that Appellant could receive a sentence of double the statutory maximum. Because the order denying relief on this ground fails to attach portions of the record which refute this claim, we reverse and remand this cause with instructions that the lower court either attach portions of the record that refute his cláim or conduct an evidentiary hearing.
Appellant’s other points on appeal are either redundant, not cognizable under rule 3.850, or are otherwise lacking in merit.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
THOMPSON, MONACO and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Roberts v. State, 923 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…2 So. 2d 1284 (Fla.2002), and the fact that both the firearms reclassification provisions of section 775.087(1) and the habitual felony offender provisions of section 775.084 have been labeled as sentencing enhancement statutes. See Kearse v. State, 876 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (noting that the state intended to seek felony habitual offender enhancement of defendant’s sentence);1 Maxwell v. State, 803 So. 2d 815, 818 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (noting that the weapons use statute is an enhancement statute). Co…
-
Klaus v. State, 236 So. 3d 483 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…dentiary hearing on this claim, we reverse and remand claim six of Appellant's motion for the postconviction court to either attach portions of the record to rebut Appellant's claim or grant an evidentiary hearing on the claim. See Kearse v. State , 876 So. 2d 1291, 1292 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) ; see also Evans , 210 So. 3d at 705 n.1. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm as to Appellant's other four claims. We reverse and remand the court's order denying Appellant's second, fourth, and sixth claims w…
-
Bradley v. State, 128 So. 3d 949 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…fails to attach portions of the record that refute this claim, we reverse and remand this matter with instructions that the lower court either attach portions of the record to refute this claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing. See Kearse v. State, 876 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). We find no merit in Bradley’s remaining issue. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED. ORFINGER, LAWSON and BERGER, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence