McCLENDON v. STATE, 861 So.2d 1213 (Fla.App. 2 Dist. 2003)

Case No. 2D03-3471.District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Opinion filed December 10, 2003.

Appeal pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County, Linda R. Allan, Judge.

Page 1214

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Alexander v. State, 830 So.2d 899 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Camille v. State, 803 So.2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). As this court did in Alexander, 830 So.2d at 899-900, we certify the same question of great public importance, to wit:

WHETHER ALLEGATIONS OF AFFIRMATIVE MISADVICE BY TRIAL COUNSEL ON THE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES OF A DEFENDANT’S PLEA FOR FUTURE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IN AN OTHERWISE FACIALLY SUFFICIENT MOTION ARE COGNIZABLE AS AN INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL CLAIM.

Affirmed; question certified.

CANADY, VILLANTI and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.