2024-1535•JACOB HAGEMAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Full text
S IXTH D ISTRICT C OURT OF APPEAL S TATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ Case No. 6D2024-1535 Lower Tribunal No. 17-CF-017936 _____________________________ J ACOB H AGEMAN, Appellant, v. S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee. _____________________________ Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Lee County. Margaret O. Steinbeck, Judge. October 9, 2026 WHITE, J. Jacob Hageman appeals the summary denial of his amended motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Our review is de novo, and we must accept Hageman’s factual allegations as true unless the record refutes them. See Occhicone v. State, 768 So. 2d 1037, 1041 (Fla. 2000); Chambers v. State, 363 So. 3d 1214, 1215 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023). Ground 1 of Hageman’s amended motion alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to call two exculpatory witnesses: Morgan Shores (a fact witness); and Ingrid Conrad (a latent print examiner). Hageman claimed that
2 both witnesses were available to testify, summarized the substance of their expected testimony, and explained why he believed that testimony would have changed the outcome of the trial. Because the portions of the record attached to the postconviction court’s order do not “show[] conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief” on Ground 1, we must reverse and remand “for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief.”1 Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D). Therefore, we reverse the order denying Hageman’s amended motion as to Ground 1, and remand for the postconviction court to enter a new order of denial attaching portions of the record conclusively refuting Hageman’s allegations, hold an evidentiary hearing, or conduct other proceedings consistent with this opinion and applicable law. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions. TRAVER, C.J., and NARDELLA, J., concur. Rachel E. Reese, of Rachel Reese, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and David Campbell, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED 1 We affirm the summary denial of Ground 2 of the amended motion without further discussion.
OCR transcription; preserved printed pages are authoritative
# SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA Case No. 6D2024-1535 Lower Tribunal No. 17-CF-017936 JACOB HAGEMAN, Appellant, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Lee County. Margaret O. Steinbeck, Judge. October 9, 2026 WHITE, J. Jacob Hageman appeals the summary denial of his amended motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Our review is de novo, and we must accept Hageman's factual allegations as true unless the record refutes them. See Occhicone v. State, 768 So. 2d 1037, 1041 (Fla. 2000); Chambers v. State, 363 So. 3d 1214, 1215 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023). Ground 1 of Hageman's amended motion alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to call two exculpatory witnesses: Morgan Shores (a fact witness); and Ingrid Conrad (a latent print examiner). Hageman claimed that both witnesses were available to testify, summarized the substance of their expected testimony, and explained why he believed that testimony would have changed the outcome of the trial. Because the portions of the record attached to the postconviction court's order do not "show[] conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief" on Ground 1, we must reverse and remand "for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief."1 Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D). Therefore, we reverse the order denying Hageman's amended motion as to Ground 1, and remand for the postconviction court to enter a new order of denial attaching portions of the record conclusively refuting Hageman's allegations, hold an evidentiary hearing, or conduct other proceedings consistent with this opinion and applicable law. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions. TRAVER, C.J., and NARDELLA, J., concur. Rachel E. Reese, of Rachel Reese, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and David Campbell, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED 1 We affirm the summary denial of Ground 2 of the amended motion without further discussion.
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.