Legal Opinion

Renardo A. Smith v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 31, 2017No. CASE NO. 1D16-1691PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant has filed a rule 3.850 postcon-viction motion in which he asserts that his trial counsel acted ineffectively by failing to advise him that he qualified'for a mandatory sentence, in addition to other penalties, pursuant to the prison releasee reof-fender (“PRR”) statute, section 775.082(9)(a)l., Florida Statutes (2012), prior to his rejection of two plea offers. He asserts counsel’s failure to advise him of his PRR eligibility caused him to reject the offers and proceed to a bench trial, where he was convicted. Thereafter, the state filed notice that he qualified to be sentenced as a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  2. Mathis v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Earl C. Ogden v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
  2. Muniz v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Hillsborough County)District Court, M.D. Florida · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API