Skip to main content

Garcia v. State

Citations

  • 846 So. 2d 660
  • 2003 WL 21273777

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a rule 3.170(1) motion based on the allegation that counsel misled the defendant into entering the plea was facially sufficient because it challenged the voluntariness of the plea
  • holding appellant was entitled to conflict-free counsel where counsel’s position was adverse to appellant’s
  • noting that the defendant was entitled to the appointment of conflict-free counsel when his counsel gave adverse testimony at a hearing on the defendant's motion to withdraw plea
  • noting that the defendant was entitled to the appointment of conflict-free counsel when his counsel gave adverse testimony at a hearing on the defendant’s motion to withdraw plea
  • noting that a rule 3.170( l ) motion is a critical stage proceeding
  • discussing the need for an evidentiary hearing when a criminal defendant challenges the voluntariness of plea pursuant to rule 3.170( l )

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kelly

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.