JORGE L. ROSARIO, 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 court held that the trial court erred in conclusively refuting the defendant's claim based on an inadequate plea colloquy, as the record attached did not refute the claim.
The defendant appealed the denial of his postconviction relief motion, arguing his plea was involuntary due to an inadequate plea colloquy. The trial …
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.172(C) cases and more on FLexlaw
CANADY, Judge.
Jorge Rosario appeals the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm Rosario’s second claim without comment. Because Rosario’s first claim is not conclusively refuted by the record attached to the trial court’s denial order, we reverse the denial of that claim. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(d).
Rosario contends that his no contest plea was involuntary because the trial court failed to conduct a plea colloquy that met the requirements of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(c). He claims that he was therefore unaware of his rights and that he would not have entered the plea if he had been advised of his rights. In denying this claim, the trial court attached a copy of the transcript of the proceeding at which the sentence was imposed on Rosario. The transcript does not reflect that a plea was entered at the hearing. The trial court erroneously concluded that Rosario’s claim was conclusively refuted by the transcript of the sentencing hearing.
We reverse the trial court’s denial of claim one. On remand, the trial court shall either attach those portions of the record conclusively refuting Rosario’s first claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
FULMER and KELLY, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Crumbley, 143 So. 3d 1059 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…s case realized that the medical records required special treatment. Exactly how decisions were made and by whom is not clear from this record, but the procedures described below indicate that the State was aware of the decision in State v. Rattray, 903 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), and attempted to follow those procedures. In mid-April 2012, the State filed a document entitled “State’s Memorandum of Law, Regarding Medical Records Seized in Search Warrant, and Motion to Preserve Recording.” In the first se…1 / 4