Ey v. State

Nov 7, 2003
2D03-2811
Versions:870 So. 2d 64
2003 WL 22515603

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Alexander v. State, 830 So.2d 899 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); McGee v. State, 684 So.2d 241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). As this court did in Alexander, 830 So.2d at 899-90, we certify the same question of ‍‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‍great public importance, to wit:

WHETHER ALLEGATIONS OF AFFIRMATIVE MISADVICE BY TRIAL COUNSEL ON THE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES OF A DEFENDANT‘S PLEA FOR FUTURE ‍‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‍CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IN AN OTHERWISE FACIALLY SUFFICIENT MOTION ARE COGNIZABLE AS AN INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL CLAIM.

Affirmed; question certified.

FULMER, KELLY, and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.