From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hubbard v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Nov 9, 1995
662 So. 2d 746 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Summary

holding that a negotiated sentence precludes appeal or collateral challenge of conviction and sentence on double jeopardy grounds apart from an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel

Summary of this case from Deloach v. State

Opinion

No. 95-1670.

November 9, 1995.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Duval County, Aaron K. Bowden, J.

Appellant pro se.

No appearance for Appellee.


We reverse the trial court's denial of that portion of Edward Hubbard's Rule 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court found the motion facially sufficient, but denied relief because the response filed by the state contained factual allegations which, if true, demonstrate that appellant is not entitled to relief. Neither the state's response nor the trial court's order denying appellant's motion, however, include the portion of the record cited by the state in support of those factual allegations. We must, therefore, reverse and remand to the trial court for attachment of record conclusively demonstrating that Mr. Hubbard is not entitled to relief, or for an evidentiary hearing on this issue. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(d) (1995).

We reject appellant's second allegation of error. Appellant's convictions and sentences were the product of a plea bargain between appellant and the state. Such a negotiated sentence precludes appeal from or collateral challenge of (apart from the allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel discussed above) the convictions and sentences on double jeopardy grounds. Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 1994); Harris v. State, 641 So.2d 126, 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So.2d 1194 (Fla. 1995).

WOLF, LAWRENCE, and BENTON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hubbard v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Nov 9, 1995
662 So. 2d 746 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

holding that a negotiated sentence precludes appeal or collateral challenge of conviction and sentence on double jeopardy grounds apart from an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel

Summary of this case from Deloach v. State

noting that a negotiated sentence precluded appeal or collateral challenge of conviction and sentence on double jeopardy grounds apart from an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel

Summary of this case from Weitz v. State
Case details for

Hubbard v. State

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD J. HUBBARD, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Nov 9, 1995

Citations

662 So. 2d 746 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Citing Cases

Wilkerson v. State

However, such case law applies to double jeopardy claims raised on direct appeal, not collateral appeal. See…

Weitz v. State

In the instant case, Weitz alleges just that — that his plea was involuntary because his counsel was…