From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jul 16, 1996
680 So. 2d 545 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

No. 96-440.

July 16, 1996.

Appeal from Circuit Court for Escambia County, T. Michael Jones, J.

Appellant pro se.

No appearance for Appellee.


Appellant seeks review of a final order summarily denying his motion seeking post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Of the instances of alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel asserted by appellant, only one merits discussion.

Appellant claimed that trial counsel prevented him from testifying in his own defense, notwithstanding his expressed desire to do so. Such a claim is legally sufficient. E.g., Vandenburgh v. State, 658 So.2d 181 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Wilson v. State, 647 So.2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Accordingly, we reverse and remand as to this claim only. On remand, the trial court shall either attach to its order denying relief portions of the record conclusively showing that appellant is entitled to no relief, or hold an evidentiary hearing. In all other respects, the order is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.

MINER, ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jul 16, 1996
680 So. 2d 545 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Smith v. State

Case Details

Full title:RONALD E. SMITH, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Jul 16, 1996

Citations

680 So. 2d 545 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)