MICHAEL SCOTT ANNEN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Newly Discovered Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s order summarily denying Michael Scott Annen’s motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 because the motion is refuted by the record attachments. We also affirm the trial court’s denial of Annen’s motion to amend his postconviction relief motion because, under the specific circumstances of this case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in that determination. See McConn v. State, 708 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). In his initial brief, Annen raises an issue of newly discovered evidence that may have merit. Therefore, this affirmance is without prejudice to Annen’s filing a timely, facially sufficient motion for postconviction relief based on his claim of newly discovered evidence.
Affirmed.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and WHATLEY and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lamberson v. State, 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2841 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)…Mr. Lamberson's sentences are illegal for this reason. And it is fairly straightforward that we 2The State acknowledges the absence of such findings. - 5 - are not accustomed to addressing issues for the first time on appeal. See Annen v. State, 752 So. 2d 1279, 1279 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (affirming without prejudice the order denying the appellant's postconviction motion because the appellant raised for the first time on appeal a claim with possible merit). Perhaps in an appropriate motion, Mr. Lamberson can…
Authorities Cited
- McCONN v. State, 708 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)