Legal Opinion

Alfred v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 27, 2011No. 4D10-3176PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStevenson, J.

We affirm the trial court’s order summarily denying appellant’s Rule 3.850 motion and amended motion for postconviction relief.

Appellant’s motion and amended motion raised procedurally-barred claims that his plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel and appellant’s alleged misunderstanding as to the possible sentence. This court rejected these claims on direct appeal. Alfred v. State, 998 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (holding that plea colloquy conclusively showed that appellant was not entitled to relief on his claim that counsel misadvised him as to the potential…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Teffeteller v. DuggerSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
  2. Iacono v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
  3. Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  4. Alfred v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009
  5. Polk v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Rodriguez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2017
  2. Rivero v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  3. Wisnia Etienne v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
  4. Dejesus v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  5. Smalls v. Secretary Florida Department Of Corrections (Duval County)District Court, M.D. Florida · 2021

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API