FREDERICK MCHENRY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1997-12-12
No. 97-1491
MINER, ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
702 So. 2d 297 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1997)

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court's denial of postconviction relief was improper because the record did not conclusively show the appellant was aware of potential consecutive sentences.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant sought to withdraw his guilty plea, alleging he was not informed of the possibility of consecutive sentences. The trial court denied relief,…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed a motion for postconvietion relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, alleging that he was not informed that his guilty plea could result in his receiving consecutive sentences for the crimes for which he was convicted, and seeking permission to withdraw his plea.

The trial court summarily denied relief, ruling that appellant was aware of the possible consequences when he entered his plea. In support of that ruling, the trial court attached to the record numerous documents, only one of which was referenced in the order. That document is the order placing appellant on probation; appellant signed this document at the bottom, certifying receipt thereof and the fact that its conditions had been explained to him.

This is not sufficient record support to demonstrate conclusively that appellant was not entitled to relief, as no specific reference is made therein to whether such terms were explained to appellant prior to his pleading guilty. Moreover, there is no such support in the other documents attached in the order. Thus, we reverse the order denying relief and remand this case to the trial court. On remand, the trial court should either conduct an evidentiary hearing on the appellant’s claim or attach to its order of summary denial a copy of that portion of the files and records of the trial court that conclusively shows that the appellant is entitled to no relief.

MINER, ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw