Clark v. State, 4D17–680
Decision Date | 10 January 2018 |
Docket Number | No. 4D17–680,4D17–680 |
Citation | 236 So.3d 481 |
Parties | Rashawn CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Rashawn Clark, Arcadia, pro se.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Heidi L. Bettendorf, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Rashawn Clark appeals an order summarily denying as untimely a Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The record does not conclusively refute his claim that the newly discovered fact exception applies. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(1). We reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing or attachment of portions of the record conclusively showing appellant is not entitled to relief.
In April 2009, Clark entered a plea to armed robbery. The offer he accepted provided for a 20–year cap on the prison sentence. The court sentenced him to 20 years in prison followed by 10 years of probation. This Court affirmed on direct appeal without a published opinion, on September 13, 2010. Clark v. State , 41 So.3d 229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (table). Clark filed a timely Rule 3.850 motion that was denied after evidentiary hearing and affirmed on appeal. Clark v. State , 138 So.3d 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (table).
In December 2016, Clark filed the present Rule 3.850 motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on "newly discovered evidence." See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(1) ( ). He claimed that trial counsel failed to convey a plea offer of 15 years in prison with 5 years of probation. The plea offer was dated February 26, 2009, and Clark alleged that he did not discover the offer until August 2016.
The trial court summarily denied the motion as untimely, stating that the plea offer was not newly discovered evidence because Clark's counsel was aware of the offer. We disagree. In these circumstances, trial counsel's knowledge of the plea offer is not imputed to Clark for purposes of the newly discovered fact exception of Rule 3.850(b)(1). See Petit–Homme v. State , 205 So.3d 848 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ( ). Clark's motion stated a facially sufficient exception to the time limit. He alleged that he was previously unaware of the offer because counsel did not convey it and that he could not have learned of the offer with due diligence within the two-year time limit.1 The trial court failed to attach records conclusively showing that the exception did not apply.
We express no opinion on the merits of Clark's allegations or whether he could have learned of the offer with due diligence. The record simply fails to conclusively refute the claim, so reversal is required. Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D) ().
Trial counsel's failure to convey a favorable plea offer can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. See, e.g. , Jacques v. State , 193 So.3d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). Clark's motion satisfied the elements of Alcorn v. State , 121 So.3d 419 (Fla. 2013). He alleged that he would have accepted the plea offer and his sentence would...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tribbitt v. State
...learned of a previously unconveyed plea offer through a third party and then promptly filed rule 3.850 motions. See Clark v. State , 236 So. 3d 481, 482 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) ; Petit-Homme , 205 So. 3d at 849. As did the postconviction court here, the postconviction courts in Petit-Homme and ......
-
Forbes v. State
...that "[a] claim of newly discovered evidence can be an exception to the two-year time limitation in rule 3.850(b)"); Clark v. State, 236 So. 3d 481, 482 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (holding that defense counsel's knowledge of a proposed plea deal could not be imputed to defendant for purposes of th......
-
Taylor v. State, Case No. 5D18–295
...to convey a favorable plea offer to a defendant in a criminal case can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Clark v. State , 236 So.3d 481, 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (citing Jacques v. State , 193 So.3d 1065, 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ). To adequately plead this claim, a defendant mus......
-
Brown v. State
...under the judgment and sentence that in fact were imposed").2 We recognize language that could suggest otherwise in Clark v. State , 236 So. 3d 481, 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) and Jacques v. State , 193 So.3d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). However, close review of those cases reflects that the stat......
-
Misdemeanor defense
...or more claims, the claims that are conclusively refuted must be summarily denied on the merits without a hearing. [ See Clark v. State , 236 So.3d 481, 482-83 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (Rule 3.850 motion improperly was denied as the record did not conclusively show that the defendant was not ent......