Jason Turem v. State, 220 So. 3d 504

In 2014 Jason Turem pleaded nolo contendere to aggravated stalking and was sentenced to 10 years with suspension after probation; later he pled to criminal mischief and admitted probation violations, receiving concurrent terms.
Turem filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion raising nine grounds (some repetitive), primarily alleging ineffective assistance for failing to investigate/raise competency or insanity defenses and that he was mentally ill and medicated at the plea.
Turem alleged longstanding diagnoses (bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, multiple personality), suicide attempt in jail, hallucinations, amnesia, and that counsel knew of his mental history and failed to seek competency evaluation.
The postconviction court summarily denied relief, attaching the plea colloquy transcript; the transcript contained minimal inquiry into competency (court asked counsel; counsel said "I believe so") and no direct questioning of Turem about medication or current mental status.
The Fifth DCA affirmed denial of some discrete grounds, but treated several incompetency-related grounds as one facially sufficient claim, reversed for either an evidentiary hearing or additional record attachment, allowed amendment of the facially insufficient insanity-investigation claim, and remanded the cumulative-error claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate/seek competency hearing before plea	Turem: long history of mental illness, was medicated/hallucinating, informed counsel, counsel failed to obtain evaluation, plea involuntary	State: plea colloquy and counsel's representation that Turem was competent refute claim	Court: Claim facially sufficient; record does not conclusively refute -> reverse and remand for evidentiary hearing or additional records
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate/raise insanity defense for probation-violation offenses	Turem: counsel did not investigate insanity as a defense	State: movant must allege insanity at time of offense; record supports denial	Court: Claim facially insufficient because Turem did not allege insanity at time of offense; allowed opportunity to amend
Whether cumulative error warrants relief	Turem: multiple alleged errors cumulatively prejudiced him	State: individual denials negate cumulative effect	Court: Reversed and remanded for reconsideration because reversals on other claims may affect cumulative assessment
Whether other trial-court or "newly discovered" evidence claims have merit	Turem: various trial-court errors/new evidence (as pleaded)	State: record and pleadings insufficient	Court: Affirmed summary denial of those aspects of the claims

Nelson v. State, 73 So. 3d 77 (requirement for evidentiary hearing on 3.850 unless motion and record conclusively refute claim)
Jacobs v. State, 880 So. 2d 548 (same rule on 3.850 hearings)
Peede v. State, 748 So. 2d 253 (accept movant's factual allegations as true when no evidentiary hearing and not refuted by record)
Lightbourne v. Dugger, 549 So. 2d 1364 (principle on accepting allegations without hearing)
Watts v. State, 82 So. 3d 1215 (counsel's failure to investigate competency is cognizable in 3.850)
Demarco v. State, 31 So. 3d 975 (same)
Hird v. State, 204 So. 3d 483 (facial sufficiency when defendant alleges incompetence, delusions, hallucinations at plea)
Jackson v. State, 29 So. 3d 1161 (examples of facially sufficient incompetency claims)
Thompson v. State, 88 So. 3d 312 (movant bears burden to prove incompetence; not all mental illness shows incompetence)
Luckey v. State, 979 So. 2d 353 (failure to allege insanity at time of offense renders insanity-investigation claim facially insufficient)
Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754 (leave to amend facially insufficient 3.850 claims when correctable)
Legrande v. State, 206 So. 3d 146 (if some claims require reversal, cumulative-error ground should be reconsidered)