ANDRE PITTMAN, 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.
Andre Pittman appealed the trial court's summary denial of his Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief motion raising eighteen claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court affirmed denial of most grounds but vacated and remanded two grounds concerning counsel's failure to object to allegedly improper prosecutor arguments.
The court affirmed denial of relief on most grounds. However, the court vacated and remanded grounds 16 and 18 because the trial court's summary denial was improper when the record lacked a trial transcript and supporting documents necessary to refute Pittman's ineffective assistance claims.
[1] A trial court's summary denial of a motion for post-conviction relief must be supported by attachments from the record that refute the claims, or an evidentiary hearing m…
[2] When the appellate record lacks a trial transcript, a court cannot independently review the record to determine if claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are refuted…
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“Pittman alleged in ground 16 of his motion that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the prosecutor played on familial sympathy by telling the jury that they should find Pittman guilty for the sake of their grandchildren.”
Describes one of the key prosecutorial misconduct claims—improper emotional appeal to jurors regarding their grandchildren.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePittman was tried for robbery. The prosecutor made statements in closing argument that allegedly appealed to familial sympathy (mentioning grandchildr…
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 Prosecutorial Misconduct cases and more on FLexlaw
PALMER, J.
Andre Pittman appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion seeking post-conviction relief. See Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850. Pittman’s motion raised eighteen claims of error, one of which was afforded an evidentiary hearing. We affirm the trial court’s denial of relief on all grounds except grounds 16 and 18. As to those two grounds, we vacate the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings thereon.
Pittman alleged in ground 16 of his motion that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the prosecutor played on familial sympathy by telling the jury that they should find Pittman guilty for the sake of their grandchildren. Pittman alleged in ground 18 of his motion that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor’s closing argument since he referred to “they” in describing the assailants who perpetrated the robbery, when the evidence that was presented during trial only alluded to a single perpetrator. In summarily denying these claims for post-conviction relief, the trial court did not attach any documents to support its rulings and the record before us does not contain a transcript of Pittman’s trial for our independent review. Thus, this court is unable to determine whether Pittman’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are refuted by the record. Accordingly, as to these two grounds, we vacate the trial court’s order and remand the matter with instructions for the trial court to either attach documents which support its ruling or to hold an evidentiary hearing if there is insuffi- dent evidence in the record to refute the claims. See Moye v. State, 773 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and cause REMANDED with instructions.
THOMPSON, C.J., and SHARP, W., J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Andre' Pittman v. State, 859 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…raising 23 claims. The motion was denied after an evidentiary hearing on one issue. On appeal, this court affirmed the denial of all but two claims and reversed and remanded for attachments of records or an evidentiary hearing. See Pittman v. State, 814 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). The trial court again denied these two issues and this court per curiam affirmed. See Pittman v. State, 837 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).…
Authorities Cited
- Moye v. State, 773 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)