LARRY C. GOODMAN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court may strike a pro se Rule 3.170(l) motion as a nullity when it contains only broad, general allegations of ineffective counsel without specific allegations of misadvice, affirmative misrepresentations, or coercion.
[1] A pro se Rule 3.170(l) motion containing only broad, general allegations of ineffective counsel, without specific allegations of misadvice, affirmative misrepresentations…
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 intelligence“a trial court may strike pro se rule 3.170(l) motion as a nullity unless the motion 'contains specific allegations that give rise to an adversarial relationship, such as misadvice, affirmative misrepresentations, or coercion that led to the entry of the plea'”
Standard for striking pro se Rule 3.170(l) motions, citing Sheppard v. State
Larry C. Goodman appealed the trial court's decision to strike his pro se Rule 3.170(l) motion. The motion contained broad, general allegations of ine…
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 Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Nos. 1D16-5248
1D16-5249 (Consolidated for disposition) _____________________________
LARRY C. GOODMAN,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee. ___________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Mark Borello, Judge. May 25, 2018
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Sheppard v. State, 17 So. 3d 275, 286-87 (Fla. 2009) (agreeing that a trial court may strike pro se rule 3.170(l) motion as a nullity unless the motion “contains specific allegations that give rise to an adversarial relationship, such as misadvice, affirmative misrepresentations, or coercion that led to the entry of the plea”); Echeverria v. State, 33 So. 3d 802, 804 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (holding that a defendant’s “broad, general allegations of ineffectiveness of his counsel do not indicate misadvice, coercion, or misrepresentation that would require a hearing under Sheppard.”).
WOLF, WINOKUR, and JAY, JJ., concur.
2
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Justin F. Karpf, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Holly N. Simcox, Assistant Attorney General, and Sharon S. Traxler, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sheppard v. State, 17 So. 3d 275 (Fla. 2009)
- Echeverria v. State, 33 So. 3d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)