TERRENCE E. SURRATT, 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.
Terrence Surratt appeals the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion. On remand from a prior reversal, the trial court again summarily denied his motion, but failed to attach exhibits needed to refute his claim that no adjudication of guilt was ever entered. The court reverses as to this one claim and affirms denial of the remaining sixteen claims.
The court reverses the summary denial as to the claim regarding lack of adjudication of guilt because the necessary record exhibits were not attached to the order, and affirms the denial as to the other sixteen claims. On remand, the trial court must either attach the relevant portions of the case file demonstrating entitlement to no relief, or conduct an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A trial court's order summarily denying a motion for postconviction relief must contain attachments refuting the movant's claims, not merely a copy of the state's respons…
[2] When a defendant claims the record does not establish guilt adjudication for the crimes for which they are serving sentences, the state must provide record attachments to…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the order summarily denying Surratt's motion merely attached a copy of the state's response to the motion and contained no other attachments to refute Surratt's claims”
Describes the deficiency in the prior order that led to the first reversal and remand
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSurratt is serving a prison sentence. He filed a motion for postconviction relief raising seventeen claims. The trial court initially summarily denied…
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 Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PARKER, Judge.
Terrence E. Surratt appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief entered following this court’s reversal and remand of the first summary denial. In Surratt v. State, 659 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), this court reversed and remanded Surratt’s ease to the trial court because the order summarily denying Surratt’s motion merely attached a copy of the state’s response to the motion and contained no other attachments to refute Surratt’s claims.
Surratt now appeals the order which again denied his motion. The order now before us on appeal attaches the state’s amended response to the motion and the state’s record attachments. We conclude that only one of Surratt’s claims has merit. Surratt contends that the record does not establish that the trial court ever adjudicated him guilty of the crimes for which he is now serving prison sentences. Neither the trial court nor the state has attached to the order denying relief any portion of the record to refute that claim. The state’s response on this issue refers to exhibits A, B, C, and D. However, none of those exhibits are included in the record before this court. Accordingly, we reverse that portion of the order denying relief on that claim and affirm the order denying relief on the other sixteen issues Surratt raises.
On remand, if the trial court again concludes that summary denial of that claim is proper, it must attach to its order those portions of the case file and record which demonstrate that Surratt is entitled to no relief; otherwise, the trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the merits of Surratt’s remaining claim.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
RYDER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA, J., concur.