EDWARD S. LAMBERT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Postconviction Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of an order denying his Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. We find that the allegations of appellant’s motion are facially sufficient to state a claim for relief, and the trial court erred in failing to either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach to its order those portions of the record which refute the pertinent allegations. On remand, should the trial court again summarily deny appellant’s motion it must attach to its order the relevant portions of the record; otherwise, appellant must be afforded an evidentiary hearing. In either event, to thereafter obtain further review appellant must then appeal the new ruling of the trial court. See generally, Lofton v. State, 442 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
The order appealed is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
MILLS, J., and McCORD, Jr. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ruiz v. State, 454 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…ach to any summary denial the record refuting allegations as they may relate to the understanding of the interpreter or to conduct an evidentiary hearing. Any order entered thereon or thereafter is to be reviewable by a new appeal. Lambert v. State, 446 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Reversed and remanded with directions.…
Authorities Cited
- Curtis v. Woodard, 442 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)