History
  • No items yet
midpage
Hayes v. State
665 So. 2d 353
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1995
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

This appeal arises from an order summarily denying Appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. We affirm the denial as to the first and second grounds. As to the third ground, Appellant alleged that his plea was involuntary because counsel made affirmative misrepresentations regarding the forfeiture of accumulated gain-time. Since the motion and attachment do not conclusively show that Hayes is not entitled to relief, we are required to reverse and remand for further proceedings under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Leroux v. State, 656 So.2d 558 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. granted, 663 So.2d 632 (Fla.1995); Carmichael v. State, 631 So.2d 346 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Eady v. State, 604 So.2d 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), after remand, 622 So.2d 61 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

BOOTH, JOANOS and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Hayes v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Dec 28, 1995
Citation: 665 So. 2d 353
Docket Number: No. 95-455
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.