KIRKLAND WASHINGTON, 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.
Kirkland Washington appealed the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that Washington's claim that trial counsel failed to inform him the victim was unavailable to testify was legally sufficient and required an evidentiary hearing rather than summary denial.
The trial court erred in summarily denying the claim because Washington's allegation was legally sufficient and not conclusively refuted by the record. The court was required to accept the assertion as true absent record evidence refuting it, and must conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach record portions conclusively refuting the claim.
[1] A trial court may summarily deny a motion for postconviction relief only if the claims asserted are legally insufficient or conclusively refuted by the record.
[2] Allegations in a motion for postconviction relief must be accepted as true to the extent they are not refuted by the record.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial court may summarily deny a motion for postconviction relief only if the claims asserted are either legally insufficient or conclusively refuted by the record.”
Establishes the legal standard for summary denial of postconviction motions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWashington entered a guilty plea on the date trial was scheduled to begin after jury selection had already occurred. The State offered a last-minute p…
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 Evidentiary Hearing Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Kirkland Washington, Appellant, appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He raises several grounds for relief, only one of which merits discussion. Appellant argues the trial court erred in summarily denying his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise him of the victim’s unavailability to testify at trial. We agree. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Appellant entered his guilty plea on the date that trial was set to begin. Jury selection had already taken place, but the State extended Appellant a last-minute plea offer. Appellant was informed that if he did not accept the plea offer, trial would begin immediately. Appellant accepted the offer and entered a plea accordingly. After Appellant’s judgment and sentence were affirmed, he filed the instant motion for postconviction relief, alleging, among other things, that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform him, prior to the entry of his plea, that the victim was not available to testify against him at trial. He claimed he would not have entered a guilty plea and would have insisted on going to trial if he had known the victim was unavailable that day. The trial court summarily denied Appellant relief on this ground because it was “completely speculative.”
A trial court may summarily deny a motion for postconviction relief only if the claims asserted are either legally insufficient or conclusively refuted by the record. Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1061 (Fla.2000). If the postconviction defendant’s claims are legally sufficient, the trial court must attach portions of the record that conclusively refute the claims. Ortiz v. State, 968 So.2d 681, 684 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). If the court cannot do so, summary denial is improper, and an evi-*1128dentiary hearing is required. See id. The allegations in a Rule 8.850 motion must be accepted as true to the extent they are not refuted by the record. Id.
Here, the trial court applied an improper standard. Appellant’s claim that he would not have entered a guilty plea and would have insisted on going to trial if counsel had informed him of the victim’s unavailability to testify at the trial that was scheduled to begin that morning was legally sufficient. Even if the assertion that the victim was not available to testify at the trial was speculative, as the trial court concluded, the court was required to accept it as true absent record evidence refuting the claim. Therefore, as to this issue only, we reverse and remand for either an evidentiary hearing or for record attachments conclusively refuting the allegation that counsel knew the victim was unavailable for the impending trial and neglected to tell Appellant. In all other respects, the trial court’s order is affirmed.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with directions.
WEBSTER, BROWNING, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Skyler Jones v. State, 35 So. 3d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…court failed to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting Appellant’s sixth claim that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to protect his right to a speedy trial and in failing to file a motion for discharge. See Washington v. State, 10 So. 3d 1126, 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (noting that a trial court must attach to its order portions of the record that conclusively refute a legally sufficient postconviction claim or hold an evidentiary hearing). With respect to claim eight wherein Appellant…
-
Kirkland v. State, 41 So. 3d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…Appellant does not allege that he only entered a plea to the striking and killing of Crystal Riley. Allegations made in a motion for postconviction relief must be accepted as true insofar as they are not refuted by the record. Washington v. State, 10 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). Where Appellant admitted to driving without a license and striking both victims, resulting in the death of one of the victims and serious injury to the other, his allegation that convictions for both driving without a valid driv…
-
Gallion v. State, 154 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…ments or for an evidentiary hearing where the trial court failed to assemble a record from which it could be conclusively determined that the appellant was not entitled to any relief on his facially sufficient rule 3.850 claim); Washington v. State, 10 So. 3d 1126, 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“If the postconviction defendant’s claims are legally sufficient, the trial court must attach portions of the record that conclusively refute the claims.”). AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with instructi…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2000)
- Ortiz v. State, 968 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)