OLIVER BELL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Abuse Of Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Oliver Bell appeals the dismissal of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court dismissed the motion as successive and an abuse of procedure.
When a trial court denies a motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing, rule 3.850 requires the attachment to the order of “that portion of the files and records which conclusively shows that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” The rule does not expressly provide for such attachments when the trial court dismisses a motion after finding that it is successive. Without the attachment of any prior motions filed by the prisoner and other pertinent records in the case, however, this court is precluded from adequately reviewing the order of dismissal. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the attachment of any documents in the record that support the trial court’s dismissal. Any party aggrieved by the trial court’s subsequent action shall file a notice of appeal within thirty days.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 719 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…of the motion and the order. However, in order to uphold a denial on the basis of rule 3.850(f) (successive motions), excerpts from the record demonstrating the successiveness of the motion must be attached to the order of denial. See Bell v. State, 585 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (reversing order denying postconviction motion as successive and abuse of procedure for failure to attach prior motions and pertinent records to permit the appellate court to review the dismissal). The state’s supplying them in an…
-
Waterfield v. State, 736 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…e motion itself or the record attachments referenced by the first order. Without the attachment of the pri- or motion or the record attachments, we cannot adequately review the basis for the trial court’s order denying the motion. See Bell v. State, 585 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Therefore, we reverse and remand. On remand the trial court may again deny Waterfield’s motion as untimely or successive, provided that record attachments conclusively demonstrate that the motion is untimely or successive. Reve…
-
Tadaryl Williams v. State, 689 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…ive motion that is facially sufficient cannot be reviewed under the summary procedure in rule 9.140(f) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure unless the material parts of the record in the previous case are attached to the order. Bell v. State, 585 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). [*1218] As explained in rule 9.140(i), the record in an appeal from an order summarily denying a motion under rule 3.850 or rule 3.800(a) consists of “conformed copies of the motion, order, motion for rehearing, and order thereon…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence