JAMES BLACK, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed summary denial of postconviction relief motion challenging guilty plea and ineffective assistance of counsel because the motion was unsworn, despite trial court's procedural error in failing to attach the plea form to its order.
An unsworn motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 is insufficient to raise claims of involuntary guilty plea and ineffective assistance of counsel, warranting summary denial.
[1] An unsworn motion for postconviction relief is insufficient to raise claims of involuntary guilty plea and ineffective assistance of counsel, and summary denial is proper…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“the trial court neglected to attach the plea form to its order denying relief. Although reversal would be necessary given the trial court's failure to attach this critical portion of the record, we must affirm the summary denial due to the insufficiency of the unsworn motion.”
Court explaining why it affirmed despite trial court's procedural error
Appellant filed an unsworn motion for postconviction relief alleging his guilty plea was involuntary and that trial counsel rendered ineffective assis…
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 Sworn Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his unsworn motion, appellant alleged that his guilty plea was involuntary and that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance.
The trial court properly rejected appellant’s assertion that the plea was involuntary. Although the court correctly noted that the ineffective assistance claim could be refuted by appellant’s contrary representations on a plea form, see Cameron v. State, 582 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), and Thomas v. State, 419 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), the trial court neglected to attach the plea form to its order denying relief. Although reversal would be necessary given the trial court’s failure to attach this critical portion of the record, we must affirm the summary denial due to the insufficiency of the unsworn motion. See Scott v. State, 464 So. 2d 1171 (Fla.1985); Williams v. State, 580 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Ross v. State, 598 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
Accordingly, we affirm the denial of appellant’s motion without prejudice to the filing of a properly sworn motion. BOOTH and MINER, JJ., concur. BARFIELD, J., concurs with opinion.
BARFIELD, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result only. If the motion in this case were properly sworn, the order of the trial court would still be affirmable because the contents of the motion are facially insufficient to set forth the claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. If the only defect in this appeal is the failure to attach the plea agreement as referenced in the judge’s order, such defect is easily remedied by requesting the trial court to forward the document that was omitted from the record. Reversal would not be necessary.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Love v. State, 623 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…-conviction relief was not properly sworn as required by rule 3.850, in the format prescribed by rule 3.987. Therefore, we affirm without reaching the merits of appellant’s allegations. See Scott v. State, 464 So. 2d 1171 (Fla.1985); Black v. State, 610 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Woolbright v. State, 606 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Peavy v. State, 599 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Accordingly, the trial court’s order denying the motion for post-conviction relief is affirmed without prejudice to ap…
-
Widmer v. State, 641 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…hat no legal basis had been raised to attack appellant’s plea. We affirm the denial of this motion, but for a different reason. The motion itself is unsworn and therefore facially insufficient to present a claim under rule 3.850. See Black v. State, 610 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).1 The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel to represent him in the motion for post-conviction relief. AFFIRMED. LAWRENCE and DAVIS, JJ., concur. . We note, ho…
-
Wilkinson v. State, 750 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…was affirmed by this court on October 1,1998. Appellant moved for rehearing of the denial of the instant motion. In his rehearing motion, appellant correctly stated that the trial court overlooked that this court’s affirmance cited Black v. State, 610 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). See Wilkinson v. State, 742 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). The citation to Black was an indicator that this court affirmed the trial court’s denial due to the legal insufficiency of the unsworn prior motion, but this court did…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Scott v. State, 464 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 1985)
- Thomas v. State, 419 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Outlaw v. State, 582 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Ross v. State, 598 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Brown v. Brown, 580 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Williams v. State, 580 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)