Summary
In Carter, 752 So.2d at 725, this Court ordered an evidentiary hearing only as to whether defense counsel advised Carter that the sentence in this case and the conditional release violation sentence would run concurrently.
Summary of this case from Carter v. StateOpinion
No. 3D99-757.
Opinion filed March 15, 2000.
An appeal under Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(i) from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Leslie B. Rothenberg, Judge, L.T. No. 96-12983.
James Carter, in proper person.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Sylvie Perez-Posner, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before COPE, SHEVIN and SORONDO, JJ.
James E. Carter appeals an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
In point one of his postconviction motion, defendant-appellant Carter contends that, prior to entering into his plea agreement in the instant case, he was advised by his trial counsel that the sentence would run concurrently with the time he would be ordered to serve on his then-pending conditional release violation. In fact, defendant's sentences are consecutive. The record does not conclusively refute this claim of affirmative misadvice by counsel. See State v. Leroux, 689 So.2d 235, 237 (Fla. 1996); Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(i). We remand for an evidentiary hearing on that issue only. We concur with the trial court that the record conclusively refutes the remainder of appellant's claims.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.