JAMES ROBERT HOPE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1993-10-15
No. 93-1228
ZEHMER, C.J., and JOANOS and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
625 So. 2d 127 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1993) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the trial court’s order denying Hope’s motion for post-conviction relief. The trial court found that Hope’s allegations lacked merit in light of his plea of guilty and his negotiated sentence. The court also found that Hope was apprised of, and afforded the opportunity to question, the terms of his sentence in open court. However, the trial court failed to attach any portions of the record substantiating its findings. Accordingly, since the record before us fails to show conclusively that Hope is entitled to no relief, the order is reversed and the cause remanded either for attachment of those portions of the record establishing that Hope is entitled to no relief, or for further proceedings consistent with rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

ZEHMER, C.J., and JOANOS and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Mitchell v. State, 699 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
    …have been raised in the previous motion. Therefore, we must reverse and remand for attachment of records conclusively demonstrating Mitchell is not entitled to any relief, or for further proceedings consistent with rule 3.850. See Kiser v. State, 625 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). On remand, pursuant rule 3.850(f), the trial court must consider any claims which were raised in the prior motion, unless such were previously denied on the merits. See Zeigler v. State, 632 So. 2d 48 (Fla.1993); Scott v. State,…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw