RALPH WILLIAM LANE, 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.
Ralph William Lane appealed a trial court's summary denial of his Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief motion, challenging his nolo contendere plea to second-degree murder. The appellate court affirmed the denial on some grounds but reversed and remanded on others due to the trial court's failure to attach the plea agreement to its order.
The court affirmed summary denial as to Lane's innocence claim and sentencing claim, but reversed and remanded as to the coerced plea and ineffective counsel claims because the trial court failed to attach the plea agreement to its order as required by Rule 3.850, preventing meaningful appellate review of whether those claims were refuted by the agreement.
[1] A motion for post-conviction relief alleging a coerced plea and ineffective assistance of counsel must be denied if the allegations are conclusively refuted by the writte…
[2] A trial court must attach to its order denying a motion for post-conviction relief those portions of the files and records that conclusively show the movant is entitled t…
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“a copy of that agreement is not attached to the order as required by Rule 3.850. Therefore, as to grounds 1) and 3) only, the order of the trial court is reversed, and the case remanded for either attachment of those portions of the files and records conclusively showing that Lane is entitled to no relief, or for further proceedings in accordance with Rule 3.850.”
Establishes the court's holding that the trial court's failure to attach the plea agreement to its summary denial order requires reversal and remand for coerced plea and ineffective counsel claims.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn March 1989, Lane pleaded nolo contendere to second-degree murder and was sentenced to twelve years incarceration followed by ten years probation. H…
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 Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ralph William Lane has appealed from an order of the trial court summarily denying his motion for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings under the rule.
In March 1989, Lane pled nolo conten-dere to second-degree murder, a first-degree felony punishable by life. § 782.04(2), Fla.Stat. (1987). He was sentenced to twelve years incarceration, followed by ten years probation; no appeal was taken. Lane thereafter filed the instant motion, alleging that 1) his plea was coerced by threats of severe punishment by the state attorney; 2) he was not guilty; 3) his trial counsel was ineffective; and 4) his probationary split sentence was illegal. The trial court summarily denied the motion, finding that the allegations were refuted by the written plea agreement. The order purports to attach a copy of that agreement, but no such copy appears in our record.
Lane’s motion was correctly denied as to grounds 2) and 4) set forth above. The former should have been raised on direct appeal, and the type of sentence complained of in the latter was validated in Glass v. State, 574 So. 2d 1099 (Fla.1991). As to grounds 1) and 3), the trial court found them refuted by Lane’s written plea agreement. However, a copy of that agreement is not attached to the order as required by Rule 3.850. Therefore, as to grounds 1) and 3) only, the order of the trial court is reversed, and the case remanded for either attachment of those portions of the files and records conclusively showing that Lane is entitled to no relief, or for further proceedings in accordance with Rule 3.850. The order is in all other respects affirmed. Reversed and remanded with directions.1
JOANOS, C.J., and SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur. . Because reversal in this case is based entirely on the trial court's omission to attach those portions of the files and records conclusively showing that Lane is entitled to no relief, we do not request a response from the Attorney General prior to reversal as set forth in Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baker v. State, 598 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1992)…PER CURIAM. We have for review Baker v. State, 591 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in which the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s holding that a life sentence is mandatory under the habitual offender statute1 when a defendant is habitualized on a first-degree felony. We accept jurisdict…
Authorities Cited
- Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Glass v. State, 574 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 1991)