STANLEY DALLAS BURNS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.850 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Even though the lower court’s stated reason for denial is erroneous, the summary denial of appellant’s Rule 3.850 motion is affirmed without prejudice. Appellant may file an amended motion, in compliance with Rule 3.850(c)(3), that states “whether a previous posteonviction motion has been filed, and if so, how many.” See Daniels v. State, 597 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Evans v. State, 388 So. 2d 1366 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Moreover, several of the allegations in Appellant’s Rule 3.850 motion are legally insufficient. If Appellant files an amended 3.850 petition, he shall file claims that meet the requirements of the rule. The lower court should address on the merits any legally sufficient claims of ineffective assistance of counsel raised in Appellant’s motion.
AFFIRMED.
W. SHARP, GRIFFIN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 686 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…rule 3.850(c)), review denied, 668 So. 2d 602 (Fla.1996). We agree, however, that the trial court’s order of dismissal should have been with leave to file an amended motion conforming to the requirements of rule 3.850(c). See Brown; Burns v. State, 651 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Williams v. State, 580 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order of dismissal. Because the allegations contained in appellant’s motion are otherwise legally sufficient, our affirmance is wi…
-
Groves v. State, 668 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…ntents requirements set forth in subsection (c) of the rule. Deese v. State, 530 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA) (failure to comply with Rule 3.850 requirements rendered motion facially insufficient), rev. dism., 534 So. 2d 398 (Fla.1988); Burns v. State, 651 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (although trial court’s stated reason for denial of Rule 3.850 was erroneous, summary denial was affirmed, without prejudice for the appellant to file an amended motion below complying with the contents requirements of the rule);…
-
Dublin v. State, 681 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…under oath), we affirm the denial of that motion without prejudice to Dublin to file an amended motion pursuant to rule 3.850, which conforms to the requirements of that rule. See Groves v. State, 668 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Burns v. State, 651 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). See also McClain v. State, 673 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Caldwell v. State, 659 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Gentry. AFFIRMED; REMANDED without prejudice to defendant to refile amended rule 3.850 motion. COBB and HAR…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Evans v. State, 388 So. 2d 1366 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Daniels v. State, 597 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- Nelams v. State, 597 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)