Case Name: Wylie M. VICKERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2004-03-19
Citations: 869 So. 2d 623
Docket Number: No. 5D03-3128
Parties: Wylie M. VICKERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: SHARP, W. and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 869
Pages: 623–629

Head Matter:
Wylie M. VICKERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D03-3128.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
March 19, 2004.
Wylie M. Vickery, Crawfordville, pro se.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lamya A. Henry, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Wylie M. Vick-ery, filed a motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, claiming, inter alia, ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. Vick-ery, convicted of lewd or lascivious assault on a child as charged, asserted that his trial counsel was ineffective because she did not request a jury instruction regarding the lesser included offense of simple battery. The trial court summarily denied Vickery's motion without an evidentiary hearing. "A motion for postconviction relief can be denied without an evidentiary hearing when the motion and the record conclusively demonstrate that the movant is entitled to no relief." Kennedy v. State, 547 So.2d 912, 913 (Fla.1989) (citing Agan v. State, 503 So.2d 1254 (Fla.1987); O'Callaghan v. State, 461 So.2d 1354 (Fla.1984)). We determine that the trial court incorrectly denied Vickery's motion.
The trial court denied Vickery's claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the decision in Sanders v. State, 847 So.2d 504 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). In Sanders, the court held that in collateral proceedings under rule 3.850 regarding a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant cannot establish that there is a reasonable probability that the result would have been different had trial counsel requested and received the instruction regarding the lesser included offense. Instead, the most that the defendant can establish is conjecture and speculation that the jury would decline to follow the law and grant the defendant a jury pardon. However, the decision in Sanders conflicts with our decisions in Bethea v. State, 767 So.2d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), and Oehling v. State, 659 So.2d 1226 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), wherein this court held that failure of trial counsel to request a lesser included offense is a basis for a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because the trial court summarily denied Vickery's motion, we reverse and remand for a hearing regarding this specific claim. As to the other claims raised by Vickery in his motion, we affirm.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.
SHARP, W. and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
SAWAYA, C.J., concurs and concurs specially, with opinion.