Washington v. State
Washington v. State
Opinion of the Court
We reverse the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Appellant’s motion alleging that his counsel was ineffective was not refuted by the exhibits attached to the State’s response and incorporated into the trial court’s order. A claimant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim if he specifies facts, not conclusively rebutted by the record, demonstrating counsel’s deficiency in performance that prejudiced him. Rose v. State, 617 So.2d 291, 296 (Fla.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 903, 114 S.Ct. 279, 126 L.Ed.2d 230 (1993). Therefore, the order denying relief is reversed and remand
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.