LEONARD M. REDIFER, 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 summary denial of the motion for postconviction relief was improper because the allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel were facially sufficient and the record attachments were missing.
Appellant sought postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to cross-examine a witness and challenge a discovery den…
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 Record Attachments cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Leonard M. Redifer appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief sought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Only two of the three grounds Redifer raises, which concern ineffective assistance of counsel, may be meritorious.
Redifer claims that his counsel was ineffective in failing first to cross-examine the victim who allegedly was committing perjury, and second, in failing to effectively challenge the denial of defense’s request to produce the clothing Redifer wore when his alleged crimes occurred. The allegations appear facially sufficient; however, neither Redifer nor the court attaches portions of the record which substantiate or refute the arguments.
We continue to require attachments to orders denying relief in rule 3.850 proceedings. See Causey v. State, 636 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Accordingly, we reverse the order of denial as it relates to the two issues described above and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court again denies the motion, it must attach those portions of the record that refute Redifer⅛ allegations; alternatively the trial court shall conduct an evidentiary hearing on the matter. In all other respects the order denying the motion is affirmed.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and FULMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bryant v. State, 661 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…sel coerced appellant. into testifying in circuit court case number 90-1387. In our prior review of this case, we remanded because the trial court denied relief without attaching portions of the record refuting appellant’s claims. Bryant v. State, 641 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Attached to the second order denying relief are portions of the trial transcript, discovery documents, certificates of service, and responses to the mandate filed by defense counsel and the state. These documents do not, however,…
Authorities Cited
- Causey v. State, 636 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)