CHARLIE BENNETT PRYOR, 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 reversed trial court's dismissal of successive post-conviction relief motion because the court failed to attach prior motions and pertinent records necessary for adequate appellate review.
A trial court dismissing a post-conviction relief motion as successive must attach prior motions and pertinent records to the order to enable adequate appellate review.
[1] When dismissing a post-conviction relief motion as successive under Rule 3.850, a trial court must attach prior motions and pertinent records to enable adequate appellate…
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“[Rule 3.850] 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.”
Court citing Bell v. State regarding the necessity of attaching prior motions and records when dismissing successive post-conviction motions.
Pryor filed a post-conviction relief motion that the trial court dismissed as successive without attaching any prior motions or supporting documentati…
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 Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Pryor appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion for post-conviction relief. The court’s denial was based on its finding that the motion was a successive one which failed to allege any new or different grounds for relief, and which, in addition, had received a prior ruling on its merits; however, the court failed to .attach any portion of the record substantiating its ruling. As was observed in Bell v. State, 585 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991):
[Rule 3.850] 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.
Id. Due to the serious nature of Pryor’s allegations, as well as his apparent confusion regarding the ramifications of the first order of dismissal (which, incidentally, did not inform Pryor of his right to appeal), we reverse and remand the cause for the attachment of any documents in the record that would support the court’s dismissal, or for further proceedings consistent with the rule.
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
ZEHMER, C.J., and WEBSTER, J., concur. BARFIELD, J., dissents with written opinion.
[*918] BARFIELD, Judge,
dissenting.
Were it not for the insufficiency of the motion filed with the trial court to state a basis for relief, I would be inclined to agree with my colleagues and reverse as the majority has done. However, the record before this court contains the motion and arguments in their entirety as filed with the trial court. It is my belief that those pleadings, on their face, will fail to afford relief to appellant. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent and would affirm.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
George v. State, 710 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…the trial court had failed to rule on the merits of his previously filed 3.850 motion. Once appellant complied with the rule it was incumbent upon the trial court to attach those portions of the record substantiating its ruling. See Pryor v. State, 625 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). There was no copy of the prior motion or other documents attached to the order. Therefore, the cause is remanded for the attachment of any documents that would support the court’s ruling or for further proceedings consistent wit…
Authorities Cited
- Bell v. State, 585 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)