PAUL WILSON, 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.
The trial court's summary denial of a post-conviction relief motion must be reversed and remanded because it failed to attach portions of the record to refute the claims.
Appellant filed a motion for post-conviction relief asserting ineffective assistance of counsel and a due process violation. The trial court denied th…
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 Attachments cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Paul Wilson [‘Wilson”] appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.8501 motion for post-conviction relief. The motion asserted eleven claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and one due process violation. An amendment added five additional claims of ineffective assistance of trial-counsel.
The trial court ordered the State to respond, but no response was filed. The trial court then entered an order stating that: 1) Wilson’s counsel was prepared for trial, 2) no deficient conduct appeared from the record, and 3) the verdicts were supported by the overwhelming evidence presented and that any deficiencies of counsel are insufficient to warrant a new trial or modification of sentence. The trial court failed to attach any portions of the record to support the denial order, however. Wilson moved for rehearing, but the trial court denied the motion. On appeal, the State concedes, and we agree, that the trial court’s order must be sent back for the attachment of portions of the record to refute Wilson’s claims.2 See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(d).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIFFIN, PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur. . Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850.
. The exception is the due process claim (claim 12), which could have been raised on direct appeal.