PRADEL LUCAS, 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 Fourth District reversed the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief and remanded for an evidentiary hearing because the court failed to attach records conclusively demonstrating the defendant was not entitled to relief under Rule 3.850.
A trial court must either attach records conclusively demonstrating a defendant is not entitled to post-conviction relief or grant an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A trial court cannot summarily deny a Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion without attaching records conclusively demonstrating the defendant is not entitled to relief or gr…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePradel Lucas sought post-conviction relief on four grounds: improper jury composition due to the state's peremptory challenges, ineffective assistance…
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 Tainted Confession cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of an order denying post-conviction relief.
The motion filed in the trial court sought relief based upon four grounds: 1) the jury was prejudicially composed of all females and only one black person due to the state’s improper use of its peremptory challenges to exclude blacks and males, 2) trial counsel was ineffective for having failed to object to the state’s improper use of its peremptory challenges and to the resulting venire, 3) trial counsel was ineffective for having failed to demonstrate that appellant was arrested without a warrant and without probable cause, resulting in a subsequent tainted confession, and 4) trial counsel was ineffective for having failed to investigate and call witnesses whose testimony would have demonstrated an unlawful arrest.
Although the first ground is reviewable on direct appeal and, thus, not cognizable under Rule 3.850, Bush v. Wainwright, 505 So. 2d 409 (Fla.1987), the remaining grounds are properly reviewable pursuant to said rule. Jones v. State, 446 So. 2d 1059 (Fla.1984). In order to deny said motion without an evidentiary hearing, the court must attach records and files that conclusively demonstrate that movant is not entitled to relief. Gentry v. State, 464 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).
Accordingly, the order appealed from is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to attach such portions of the record as will show that appellant is not entitled to any relief or grant appellant an evidentiary hearing.
DOWNEY, DELL and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 595 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…enged on rehearing unsuccessfully. The trial court order failed to attach portions of the record or otherwise conclusively show that appellant is entitled to no relief. Also, the issues raised in the motion were legally sufficient. Lucas v. State, 552 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Therefore, we reverse and remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing or for attachment of portions of the record showing the defendant is not entitled to relief. Taylor v. State, 583 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Gen…
Authorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 446 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1984)
- Fla. Atl. Assocs. v. Belmont, 464 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- VAN Riper v. State, 505 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 1987)