DAVID M. SUMMERS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1990-08-13
No. 90-1508
WENTWORTH, NIMMONS and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
570 So. 2d 990 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

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.

Synopsis

Appellant Summers sought clarification of an appellate order striking his brief for failure to cite the record. The court granted the motion and ordered the lower court clerk to prepare a properly indexed and numbered record, while clarifying that Rule 9.140(g) does not dispense with standard record preparation requirements.


Holding

Rule 9.140(g) limits the items included in the record and establishes a different transmittal time period but does not dispense with other record preparation requirements in Rule 9.200, such as numbering pages and providing an index. The court ordered the clerk to prepare a properly formatted amended record and gave appellant time to file a compliant amended brief.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate court may sua sponte strike a brief for failing to comply with rules requiring citations to the record.

[2] A clerk of the lower tribunal's incorrect interpretation of appellate rules does not excuse the requirement for a properly prepared record on appeal, including page numbe…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“The rule limits the items included in the record and establishes a different time period for transmittal of the record to this court. But, the rule does not dispense with the other requirements for preparation of the record as specified in Rule 9.200, such as numbering the pages and indexing.”

Establishes the court's holding that Rule 9.140(g) does not eliminate standard record preparation requirements

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Appellant filed a brief appealing denial of his Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief motion. The appellate court struck the brief because it lacked citat…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant moves for clarification of this court’s order striking appellant’s brief. We grant the motion.

Appellant appeals an order of the trial court which denied his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Upon receipt of appellant’s initial brief, this court, sua sponte, struck appellant’s brief because it failed to comply with the requirements of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210(b), as there were no citations to the record on appeal. The court’s order striking appellant’s brief gave appellant 10 days to file an amended brief which complied with the rule. Appellant has responded with a motion for clarification of the order striking the brief. Appellant asserts that the brief did not contain citations to the record because the record was not prepared in accordance with Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.200(d)(1)(B) and 9.200(d)(2); specifically, the record was not indexed and the pages were not numbered. Appellant asks this court to clarify its order to specify how citations to the record should be made in the brief when the record is not indexed nor the pages numbered. Alternatively, appellant asks that the brief be accepted as filed because the record on appeal is not lengthy.

The incorrectly prepared record is the result of the clerk of the lower tribunal’s incorrect interpretation of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(g) 1. That rule provides in pertinent part:

The clerk of the lower tribunal shall forthwith transmit to the court as the record conformed copies of the motion, order, motion for rehearing and order thereon, with a certified copy of the notice. No briefs or oral argument shall be required.

Thus, the rule limits the items included in the record2 and establishes a different time period for transmittal of the record to this court. But, the rule does not dispense with the other requirements for preparation of the record as specified in Rule 9.200, such as numbering the pages and indexing.

Accordingly, the clerk of the lower tribunal is ordered to within 15 days of the date of this order prepare and transmit to this court an amended record in which the pages are numbered and which has an index. The clerk shall provide the parties with a copy of the index. Appellant shall, within 10 days of the service by the clerk of the index, file an amended brief which contains appropriate citations to the record.

WENTWORTH, NIMMONS and ALLEN, JJ., concur. . Appellant represents that he attempted to have the record corrected but was told by the clerk of the lower tribunal that in appeals involving Rule 3.850 the record is not prepared in the same manner as a "regular” appeal. We accept appellant's representation because this is not an isolated case of the record being improperly prepared.

. Although not clearly specified in Rule 9.140, when the trial court denies the motion because a portion of the record conclusively demonstrates the prisoner is not entitled to relief, that portion of the record should also be included in the record on appeal.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …tion motions under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) or 3.850. Amended language in subdivision (b)(2)(A) makes minor changes to the contents of the record in such cases. Subdivision (b)(2)(B) addresses a conflict between Summers v. State, 570 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and Fleming v. State, 709 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), regarding indexing and pagination of records. The First District requires clerks to index and paginate the records, while the other district courts do not. The committee d…
  • …tion motions under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) or 3.850. Amended language in subdivision (b)(2)(A) makes minor changes to the contents of the record in such cases. Subdivision (b)(2)(B) addresses a conflict between Summers v. State, 570 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and Fleming v. State, 709 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), regarding indexing and pagination of records. The First District requires clerks to index and paginate the records, while the other district courts do not. The committee d…
  • Myron Fleming v. State, 709 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
    …’s affirmance of his summary appeal, brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(i), that he was denied an opportunity to file a brief and thus deprived of procedural due process. In support of this claim he cites Summers v. State, 570 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990),1 in which that court determined that summary records prepared by the circuit court clerk under the then-operative rule, 9.140(g), must be paginated and indexed according to the requirements of rule 9.200(d). Fleming asserts that…
    1 / 2

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw