JEFFREY R. HASTINGS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Record On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order denying a pro se motion for post-conviction relief.
While the state makes a valid argument that the facts of this ease as shown by trial testimony demonstrate that appellant’s actions which resulted in six separate drownings may well be considered separate for purposes of consecutive sentencing, the transcript testimony relied upon and included in the appendix to the state’s response filed in this court were not attached to the trial court’s order of denial.
A trial court may deny relief without an evidentiary hearing provided it attaches to its order portions of the record that conclusively refute the allegations. The state’s supplementation of the order with portions of the record is insufficient to support the trial court’s summary denial. See McGrady v. State, 591 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991.) See also Cherry v. State, 638 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Wheeler v. State, 634 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). Accordingly, the order is reversed and remanded for either attachment of portions of the record refuting the claim or for an evidentiary hearing.
GLICKSTEIN, DELL and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Frank v. State, 697 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…PER CURIAM. The trial court failed to attach to its order those parts of the record that conclusively refute appellant’s claims for post-conviction relief. In Hastings v. State, 670 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), this court stated that “[t]he state’s supplementation of the order with portions of the record is insufficient to support the trial court’s summary denial.” Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of appellant…
-
Hastings v. Hon. Barry Krischer, 840 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…e trial court apparently denied as successive. This court reversed and remanded because there were no record attachments demonstrating that the six drownings could be considered separate for purposes of consecutive sentencing. See Hastings v. State, 670 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). The state then submitted a second response, to which Petitioner responded with several motions, including a motion to vacate his status as a habitual offender, based on the vacation of L.T. Case No. 80-696. The state filed anoth…
-
Runge v. State, 24 So. 3d 768 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…esponse or the trial court’s order adopting the State’s reasons as grounds for the summary denial. The State is not permitted to supplement the record on appeal by filing the relevant portions of the record directly in this Court. Hastings v. State, 670 So. 2d 1176, 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Moreover, the State’s response, on which the trial court relied, included arguments that some of the claims were legally and factually insufficient. We agree with Runge’s argument that the trial court erred to the extent…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wheeler v. State, 634 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- McGRADY v. State, 591 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Hyatt Hotel & Alexsis Risk Mgmt. v. Lalu, 638 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)