WRIGHT v. STATE (2022)

Leandre Wright appeals the trial court's summary denial of his motion seeking postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his motion, Wright raised one claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, alleging that his trial counsel did not effectively advise him concerning the State's plea offer. Specifically, Wright asserted that had he been properly advised that his motions to suppress were weak, he would have accepted the State's plea offer; the State would not have withdrawn the offer; the trial court would have accepted the offer; and the sentence under the offer would have been less than the sentence imposed. See Alcorn v. State, 121 So. 3d 419 (Fla. 2013) (setting out four criteria that must be established to demonstrate prejudice arising from counsel's ineffectiveness in relation to a rejected plea offer). He further alleged that he had not wanted to go to trial and that he had not known that his sentences would be run consecutively. The State conceded that an evidentiary hearing was necessary to resolve the claim, but the trial court summarily denied Wright's motion upon finding that the pretrial colloquy between Wright and the trial court conclusively refuted his claim. Concluding that the transcript attached to the denial order does not conclusively refute Wright's claim, we reverse and remand for the trial court to attach documents conclusively refuting Wright's claim or to conduct an evidentiary hearing. See Robinson v. State, 972 So. 2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (reversing summary denial of rule 3.850 motion because claims were not conclusively refuted by the record).

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

WOZNIAK, J.

WALLIS and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.