Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2006

Burgess v. State

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided August 9, 2006 · No. 4D06-1368 · Farmer, Hazouri, Klein

935 So. 2d 119; 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 13310; 2006 WL 2265229 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Burgess v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Willie T. Burgess, appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Appellant alleged ineffective assistance of his trial counsel for failing to move to suppress his confession made to police after he was given defective Miranda1 warnings. In comparable cases, we have held that such a claim is legally sufficient. See Anthony v. State, 927 So.2d 1084 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Martelus v. State, 924 So.2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Stancle v. State, 917 So.2d 911 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). We therefore reverse and remand either for the attachment of portions of the record con*120clusively refuting the claim or for an evi-dentiary hearing.

Reversed and Remanded.

FARMER, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.