Per Curiam. The sole issue in this case is whether the trial court should have held an evidentiary hearing before ruling on appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief. We hold that no hearing was required under the facts in this case. Appellant claims that his counsel’s unfamiliarity with his cause prior to his appearance before the court caused an unintelligent waiver of his rights. <p "…
Read the full opinion (source) ↗
Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.