William Mullen v. State of Florida

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2005 WILLIAM MULLEN, Appellant, v. State, 821 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Consequently, we reverse the trial court s summary denial of claim two and remand for attachment of portions of the record refuting that claim, or for an evidentiary hearin g. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. STEVENSON, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur. CASE NO. 4D04-3274 NOT FINAL UNTIL DISPOSITION OF ANY TIMELY FILED MOTION FOR REHEARING. Opinion filed January 12, 2005 Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; John J. Murphy, III, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 023482CF10A and 02-9819 CF10A. William Mullen, Arcadia, pro se. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Donna M. Hoffmann, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee. PER CURIAM. William Mullen appeals a trial court order which summarily denied his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the summary denial of all claims except for claim two. In claim two, Mullen alleged ineffective assistance of his trial counsel for failure to ensure that his guidelines sentence was correctly scored. Appellant alleged that this ineffective assistance of counsel led him to enter his pleas and that he would not have done so had he known of the scoresheet error. The trial court failed to attach portions of the record which refute that claim. See Richardson v. State, 829 So. 2 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Brazeail v. d

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.