Havard v. StateHavard v. State
Appellants Havard and Majewski seek review of the lower court‘s denial, without a hearing, of their motion for post conviction relief. The summary denial of appellants’ motion was proper with one exception. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Appellants’ claim that they received ineffective assistance of counsel by virtue of their attorney‘s failure to investigate alibi witnesses who appellants argue could have substantiated their claim of being in another state at the time the crimes of which they were convicted were committed. Because this particular allegation states a facially sufficient claim for relief, we remand this cause for further proceedings in accordance with the provisions of
BOOTH, C.J., and ERVIN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.