Legal Opinion

Hutto v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 9, 2011No. 1D11-1063Published

1Per curiam

The appellant argues that the trial court erred in summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We agree and reverse and remand for an evi-dentiary hearing or for record attachments conclusively refuting the appellant’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellant’s claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and determine that his prior DUI convictions were uncounseled and thus improperly used to enhance his current DUI conviction is cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. See Hutto v. State,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pitts v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
  2. Hutto v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API