Case Name: David W. WAINER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2006-11-29
Citations: 943 So. 2d 894
Docket Number: No. 4D06-2393
Parties: David W. WAINER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: STEVENSON, C.J., POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 943
Pages: 894–894

Head Matter:
David W. WAINER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D06-2393.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Nov. 29, 2006.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 5, 2007.
David W. Wainer, Polk City, pro se.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and August Bonavita, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
David W. Wainer appeals the summary denial of his motion filed in accordance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reverse and remand for further review of the merits of his claim.
Though this was Wainer's second motion, we hold that it was not successive, an abuse of process, or time barred. Wainer alleged that the grounds were not known and could not have been known at the time he filed his initial motion. More specifically, he alleges that he learned of the claim, the existence of a favorable plea offer, while preparing with counsel for proceedings associated with the first motion. See generally Gallant v. State, 898 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Consequently, we remand for further review of Wainer's claim. Cottle v. State, 783 So.2d 963 (Fla.1999).
STEVENSON, C.J., POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.