Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

833 So. 2d 876

Toro v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 8, 2003

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2003-01-08

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently August 2005

1 state decisions

Relies on Lee v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2003-01-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BLUE, Chief Judge.

¶1Danny Toro appeals the denial of his postconviction relief motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We affirm the summary denial of five of the six claims presented in Toro’s motion. The remaining claim was denied following an evidentiary hearing. Because counsel should have been appointed to represent Toro at the evidentiary hearing, we re*877verse the order denying the claim presented in ground three and remand for appointment of counsel and a new eviden-tiary hearing. See Lee v. State, 801 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

¶2Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.

SALCINES and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.
/833/so2d/876 · .json · Public domain