JAY LARSON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 appellate court reversed a lower court's order that dismissed a postconviction motion with prejudice. The court found that dismissing the motion with prejudice was improper when the defendant voluntarily sought to withdraw it and the state suffered no prejudice.
No, a postconviction motion should not be dismissed with prejudice when the defendant volunteers to dismiss it, unless there is prejudice to the state or some justification for resolving the motion on the merits.
[1] A defendant's voluntary dismissal of a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion must be granted without prejudice unless the State demonstrates prejudice or the trial court ident…
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 intelligence“A typical postconviction motion should not be dismissed with prejudice when the defendant volunteers to dismiss it unless there is prejudice to the State or some justification for resolving the motion on the merits.”
Establishes the general rule for dismissing postconviction motions.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJay Larson pleaded guilty to robbery charges and filed a motion to vacate his pleas. He then filed a motion to withdraw his initial motion, seeking to…
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 Prejudice To The State cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal pursuant to Fla R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Michelle Sisco, Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Jay Larson appeals from the order dismissing his motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
We reverse the order only insofar as it dismissed the motion with prejudice. Mr. Larson entered negotiated pleas to charges of robbery in three different cases. He then filed a motion under rule 3.850 challenging his pleas in all three cases. He subsequently filed a motion to withdraw that rule 3.850 motion seeking to "reserv[e] his right" to again raise ground two in a postconviction motion "after consulting with private counsel." The postconviction court granted Mr. Larson's motion but dismissed his rule 3.850 motion with prejudice.
This court has held that "[a] typical postconviction motion should not be dismissed with prejudice when the defendant volunteers to dismiss it unless there is prejudice to the State or some justification for resolving the motion on the merits." McCray v. State, 104 So. 3d 1201, 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); see also Hansen v. State, 816 So. 2d 808, 809 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) ("Where an appellant files a timely motion for voluntary dismissal of a rule 3.850 motion, and the state suffers no prejudice, . . . [s]uch a motion should be granted without prejudice to the appellant's right to file a subsequent motion.").
Though the record reflects that the postconviction court put forth a substantial amount of work clarifying the procedural history of the cases for Mr. Larson and the potential consequences of withdrawing his negotiated pleas, it had not ruled on Mr. Larson's rule 3.850 motion and did not cite any prejudice to the State that could justify its decision to dismiss the motion with prejudice. We therefore reverse the order only to the extent that the dismissal was with prejudice.1 CASANUEVA, SMITH, and STARGEL JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.1 There is no indication in the postconviction record that Mr. Larson sought to again raise ground two in a timely filed rule 3.850 motion so that he could have been prejudiced by the postconviction court's ruling.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Mailloux v. State, 816 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- McCRAY v. State, 104 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)