MELINDA DIANE FLINT, 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 affirmed the denial of the motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, finding it failed to comply with Rule 3.850 requirements. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion to correct an illegal sentence.
Appellant appealed an order denying her motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, which was construed as a Rule 3.850 motion. She als…
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 Motion To Correct Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
NIMMONS, Judge.
Appellant appeals from an order summarily denying her “Motion For New Trial (Newly Discovered Evidence).” The motion recited that it was filed pursuant to Fla.R.Cr.P. 3.600. Although the motion was not filed within the ten-day period provided for by Rule 3.590, another panel of this court, in an earlier unpublished order entered herein, appropriately construed the appellant’s motion as a Rule 3.850 motion in accordance with the Supreme Court’s holding in Richardson v. State, 546 So. 2d 1037 (Fla.1989) (“all newly discovered evidence claims must be brought in a motion pursuant to Fla.R.Cr.P. 3.850”).
We affirm the order denying the above motion because the motion failed to comply with the requirements of Rule 3.850, including the requirement that the motion be under oath. The motion is further facially insufficient because the allegations thereof contain mere conclusions. This affirmance is without prejudice to the filing of a motion in conformance with the Rule. Williams v. State, 539 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
The appellant also appeals from another order denying the appellant’s motion to correct an alleged illegal sentence. We have examined the issue raised thereunder and find appellant’s argument to be without merit.
AFFIRMED.
ERVIN, J., and THOMPSON, FORD L. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reaves v. State, 593 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…nt performance. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Routly v. State, 590 So. 2d 397 (Fla.1991). General allegations or mere conclusions are insufficient to demonstrate entitlement to relief. Flint v. State, 561 So. 2d 1343, 1344 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Williams v. State, 553 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Moreover, “[a] court considering a claim of ineffectiveness of counsel need not make a specific ruling on the performance component of the test when it is clear that t…
-
Wooden v. State, 589 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…86). The state responds that, as to the allegation of ineffective assistance, the trial court erred in denying the motion on the stated ground. It nevertheless urges affirmance based on the conclusory nature of the allegation, citing Flint v. State, 561 So. 2d 1343, 1344 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (a 3.850 motion is facially insufficient when the allegations thereof contain mere conclusions). We agree that, as to the allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel, the trial court’s order should be affirmed on grou…
-
Mitchell v. State, 581 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…State, 577 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Mitchell’s factual allegation that the circuit court did not make the necessary findings is facially insufficient. A 3.850 motion requires allegations which are more than mere conclusions. Flint v. State, 561 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Mitchell’s right to file a properly drafted motion. Long v. State, 555 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). EEYIN and WOLF, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Richardson v. State, 546 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1989)
- Williams v. State, 539 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)