Franqui v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the court must accept the movant’s factual allegations as true in a rule 3.850 motion to the extent they are not refuted by the record
• recognizing that “mere conclusory allegations” are insufficient to state a claim under rule 3.850
• recognizing that “mere conclusory allegations” are insufficient to state a claim under rule 3.850
• stating that this Court will not substitute its judgment for that of the postconviction court on issues of witness credibility
• reviewing Strickland claims individually and cumulatively after determining that counsel may have been deficient in failing to object to multiple prosecutorial comments
• finding, based on the same evidence presented here, that the circuit court had competent, substantial evidence—two separate doctors found Franqui’s IQ was above 75 on the rule-approved psychological examinations—to find that Franqui is not mentally retarded

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).