Chris Foster v. State , 239 So. 3d 201 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •          IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
    FIFTH DISTRICT
    NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
    FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
    DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
    CHRIS FOSTER,
    Appellant,
    v.                                                  Case No. 5D17-3103
    STATE OF FLORIDA,
    Appellee.
    ________________________________/
    Opinion filed March 2, 2018
    3.850 Appeal from the Circuit
    Court for Lake County,
    Don F. Briggs, Judge.
    Chris Foster, Crawfordville, pro se.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,
    Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton,
    Assistant Attorney General, Daytona
    Beach, for Appellee.
    PER CURIAM.
    Chris Foster appeals the summary denial of Grounds One, Six, Seven, Eight, Ten,
    Eleven, and Twelve of his amended motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to
    Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. After careful consideration, we affirm the
    summary denial of Grounds One, Seven, Eight, Ten, and Twelve without further
    discussion.
    In Grounds Six and Eleven, Foster alleges that ineffective assistance of counsel
    prejudiced him and claims that he pled guilty to Count III, possession of a firearm by a
    convicted felon, based on the advice of counsel, despite the fact that the State had filed
    an amended information which did not include that charge. The State asserted that its
    intention was to simply sever that charge for a later trial; however, amending an
    information by deleting a charge has the same legal effect as entering a nolle prosequi.
    See State v. Belton, 
    468 So. 2d 495
    , 497 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Foster claims that if
    counsel had advised him that the State dropped Count III, he would not have stopped his
    trial nor pled guilty to that count.
    In the plea colloquy, Foster acknowledges that he is pleading guilty to Count III;
    however, that does not sufficiently address what advice counsel provided and whether
    Foster relied on that advice to his detriment. Accordingly, we find that the documents
    attached to the order summarily denying Grounds Six and Eleven do not conclusively
    refute those grounds. We remand for the postconviction court to either attach records
    that conclusively refute those grounds or conduct an evidentiary hearing regarding
    Grounds Six and Eleven.
    AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
    PALMER, EVANDER, and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 5D17-3103

Citation Numbers: 239 So. 3d 201

Filed Date: 2/26/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/9/2018