From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flowers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jan 7, 2005
889 So. 2d 123 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 4D04-106.

November 24, 2004. Rehearing Denied January 7, 2005.

Appeal from the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court, Broward County, Ana I. Gardiner, J.

Steven Flowers, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Myra J. Fried, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


The defendant appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. His petition requested the trial court to consider a belated motion for post-conviction relief and alleged that his privately-retained counsel had neglected to file the motion in a timely manner. The trial court summarily denied the petition. We reverse.

A defendant "might be entitled to file a belated motion for post-conviction relief if the actions of [his] attorney [frustrate his] intention to file such a motion in a timely fashion." See Ward v. Dugger, 508 So.2d 778, 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). In this case, the defendant alleged he retained private counsel to file a motion for post-conviction relief, but his attorney failed to do so. The record indicates the attorney advised the defendant he would not be doing any more work for the defendant because he had not been paid. The defendant received this information in sufficient time for the defendant to timely file the motion. Thus, it would appear that the trial court properly denied the petition.

However, the petition also alleged that the attorney "frustrated appellant's intentions to file a post conviction motion on his own behalf, by counsel receiving and being totally uncooperative in not returning [sic] appellant with his transcripts and documents concerning his case, that would be helpful in drafting his motion, after counsel agreed, but failed to file a timely post conviction claim against his revocation counsel. . . ." This allegation raises a factual issue not refuted by the record. We therefore reverse and remand the case for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether appellant retained counsel to timely file a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion; and if so, whether retained counsel frustrated the defendant's ability to file his own motion by withholding records once counsel advised the defendant he would not be doing any further work for him. See Id.

FARMER, C.J., GUNTHER and MAY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Flowers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jan 7, 2005
889 So. 2d 123 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

Flowers v. State

Case Details

Full title:Steven FLOWERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jan 7, 2005

Citations

889 So. 2d 123 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Citing Cases

De La Rosa v. State

We disagree as the trial court's finding is supported by the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing.…

Robinson v. State

Appellant does not allege that retained counsel frustrated his ability to timely file a motion. Cf. Flowers…