NICK J. SUTMAIER, 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 the circuit court erred by denying the postconviction relief motion without attaching the relevant record portions to its order.
Appellant appealed the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion. On remand, the circuit court again denied the motion without an evidentiary…
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 Evidentiary Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Nick Sutmaier timely appeals the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. This court previously reviewed the denial of his motion and remanded the case to the circuit court to comply with the requirements of rule 3.850. Sutmaier v. State, 550 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1989).
On remand, the circuit court again denied Sutmaier’s motion without an evidentiary hearing. Although the order denying the motion made specific references to materials contained in the record, copies of those portions of the record were not attached to the order as required by the rule.
Accordingly, we reverse the circuit court’s denial of the appellant’s motion and remand the case to the circuit court with directions to attach to the order the relevant portions of the record and file. The appellant shall have thirty days subsequent to the entry of the new order to again seek appellate review.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and HALL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.