Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Diego Puertas Oliva v. State
Citations: 142 So. 3d 973; 2014 WL 3605494; 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 11184Docket: 4D13-3789
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; July 23, 2014; Florida; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Diego Puertas Oliva appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 postconviction motion, challenging the effectiveness of his counsel. Oliva was charged with multiple offenses, including DUI Manslaughter, and entered a negotiated no contest plea to DUI Manslaughter/Impairment and DUI with Property Damage. The plea agreement included a cap on his prison sentence at 124.65 months, with the possibility of seeking a downward departure. However, Oliva claims he was not informed of the potential for probation in addition to the prison sentence. He cites the case Eggers v. State to support his argument that lack of information regarding probation constitutes grounds for relief. The state contends that the plea was an open plea, implying no guarantee on sentencing outcomes. Oliva argues it was a hybrid plea due to the agreed-upon cap and the state's nolle prosequi of certain charges. The court sentenced him to the maximum prison term of 124.65 months, followed by probation, which was discussed only at sentencing. The appellate court affirms the denial of ground two of Oliva's motion without comment but finds that the record does not conclusively refute ground one regarding ineffective assistance of counsel. The court reverses the lower court's decision and remands for an evidentiary hearing to explore Oliva's claim about not being advised of the possibility of probation, as the record suggests he believed his maximum exposure was limited to the agreed-upon cap. Judges Warner, Levine, and KlingenSmith concurred, noting that the decision is not final until any motion for rehearing is resolved.