SAMUEL E. GLASCO, 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 held that the trial court erred in summarily denying some of the defendant's post-conviction relief claims without conducting an evidentiary hearing or attaching the record.
The defendant appealed the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. The trial court's order cited to documents that were not attached …
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 Procedural Bar cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Samuel E. Glaseo appeals the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. With the exception of Glasco’s claim that evidence against him should have been suppressed,1 we reverse and remand to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach those portions of the record which refute Glasco’s remaining claims.2 See Hill v. State, 611 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.
GOSHORN, C.J., and COBB and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . This claim is procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal. See Kennedy v. State, 547 So. 2d 912 (Fla.1989).
. We note that throughout the four page order denying Glasco's 3.850 motion, the trial judge cited to documents refuting Glasco’s claims which the order states are attached. However, a review of the record and an inquiry to the Clerk’s Office of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit confirms that no documents were attached to the order. This is a common and recurring problem. We ask the trial courts to implement procedures to assure that referenced documents or transcripts are in fact attached to all orders denying a defendant’s 3.850 motion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bunch v. State, 622 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…as to summary denial of Rule 3.850 motions)1 that if orders summarily denying Rule 3.800(a) motions arrive in this court without the necessary record attachments, they will be reversed. AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur. . Glasco v. State, 616 So. 2d 499, 500 n. 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).…
Authorities Cited
- Kennedy v. State, 547 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1989)
- Ingram Enters. & Aetna Life & Cas. v. Langston, 611 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)