ANTHONY CHERRY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a motion for post-conviction relief must comply with the specific requirements of Rule 3.850 to avoid summary denial.
Appellant filed a motion for post-conviction relief that failed to provide specific information regarding the judgment under attack, whether there was…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
JOANOS, Judge.
Anthony Cherry appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm without prejudice to the filing of a properly drafted motion.
In addition to the requirement that a motion for post-conviction relief shall be under oath, rule 3.850 provides that the motion shall include information concerning (a) the judgment and sentence under attack; (b) whether there was an appeal from the judgment or sentence; (c) whether a previous post-conviction motion was filed; (d) if a previous motion was denied, why the claim in the present motion was not raised in a prior motion; and (e) the nature of the relief sought. Numerous decisions from this court have affirmed the summary denial of a motion for post-conviction relief due to the motion’s failure to comply with the minimum requirements of the rule. See Rowe v. State, 474 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Baker v. State, 448 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); McElroy v. State, 436 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Robinson v. State, 423 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
In this case, appellant failed to provide specific information regarding the judgment under attack, failed to mention whether there was a previous appeal or motion, and failed to set forth sufficient facts. Therefore, the order denying post-conviction relief is affirmed, without prejudice to file a properly drafted motion.
Affirmed.
SMITH, C.J., and ZEHMER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Long v. State, 555 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…s relied upon in support of the motion must also be provided. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(f). This court has affirmed the summary denial of motions for post-conviction relief where the motion failed to meet the requirements of the rule. See Cherry v. State, 526 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Rowe v. State, 474 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Baker v. State, 448 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). In the instant case, appellant’s motion is not under oath, fails to provide information concerning a previous appeal or moti…
-
Kemp v. State, 541 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…uch claim in the 3.850 motion before us. Since it cannot be assumed that he would do so, as required, under oath, e.g., Williams v. State, 539 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st [*1334] DCA 1989); Deese v. State, 530 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Cherry v. State, 526 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), and since the issue was in any case not before the trial court in any way, we decline to consider it now. See Francois v. Wainwright, 741 F. 2d 1275 (11th Cir.1984); Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32 (Fla.1985). Affirmed. . The…
Authorities Cited
- McELROY v. State, 436 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Jodie Leon Hoewischer v. State, 474 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Rowe v. State, 474 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Robinson v. State, 423 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Jarvis v. Jarvis, 448 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Baker v. State, 448 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)