LAWRENCE HUNTLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
LAWRENCE HUNTLEY, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
493 So. 2d 58
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1986)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from a summary denial of appellant’s motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. The trial court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing and failed to attach portions of the record which “conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” In such instances, Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, now requires the trial court to “order the State Attorney to file an answer or other pleading within the period of time fixed by the court or to take such other action as the judge deems appropriate.”
Accordingly, we must reverse and remand to the trial court to proceed in accordance with the rule.
BOOTH, C.J., and ERVIN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. Ira Smith, 705 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…ut expressed no opinion as to summer visitation. The trial court erred by adjudicating an issue that was neither presented by the pleadings nor litigated by the parties. See Johnson v. Johnson, 546 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Antonio v. Antonio, 493 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Brady v. Jones, 491 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (holding that the mother’s fundamental due process rights were violated where the issue of terminating visitation and telephone contact was neither presented by the pleadings nor…
-
Netherly v. State, 508 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…y least the trial court, consistent with Rule 3.850, should have required the state to respond to his motion. Thus, we reverse the denial of Netherly’s motion and remand to the trial court with directions that it follow Rule 3.850. Huntley v. State, 493 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Reversed and remanded with directions. DANAHY, C.J., and RYDER and FRANK, JJ., concur.…
-
Kippings v. State, 508 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Hodo v. State, 493 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Hadley v. State, 488 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Brown v. State, 483 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).…