Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

687 So. 2d 834

Rosero v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 4, 1996

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1996-12-04

Relies on 597 So. 2d 256 - Koenig v. State · Tobin v. Schere · Lilley v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-12-04

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2015

6 state decisions

40199620002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Appellant entered a guilty plea to burglary in 1994. He was sentenced to fifteen years of probation. He did not appeal, but filed a motion for post-conviction relief challenging his plea proceedings and claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

¶2We reverse in part the trial court’s summary denial of Appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief. Appellant claimed his plea was defective because the court failed to ensure that he made an intelligent and voluntary waiver, and failed to ascertain his competence to enter the plea. See Koenig v. State, 597 So.2d 256 (Fla.1992); Lilley v. State, 667 So.2d 887 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Shaw v. State, 546 So.2d 796 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). On these claims, we reverse and remand for attachment of other relevant portions of the record which substantiate the court’s ruling or for an evidentiary hearing.

¶3We find no error or abuse of discretion as to the other issues raised.

STONE, STEVENSON and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
/687/so2d/834 · .json · Public domain