KENNETH JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2006-05-10
No. 4D06-160
WARNER, FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
929 So. 2d 615 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s claims for post conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, except that af-firmance is without prejudice to appellant’s right to file an amended motion in the trial court within thirty days of issuance of this opinion, limited to claim three, addressing the requirement of availability of the witness, pursuant to Nelson v. State, 875 So. 2d 579, 583-84 (Fla.2004) (stating, “when a defendant fails to allege that a witness would have been available, the defendant should be granted leave to amend the motion within a specified time period”).

WARNER, FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Jones v. State, 963 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
    …without prejudice to his right to file an amended motion in the trial court limited to the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to investigate and call a witness under Nelson v. State, 875 So. 2d 579 (Fla.2004). See Jones v. State, 929 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Jones filed that amended motion, styled as his “response to this Honorable Court’s Order Dated Jan 22, 2007 to amend his amended motion for post conviction relief.” We find that the allegations he made in this latest amended m…
  • McGILL v. State, 964 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
    …ld that this is a legally cognizable claim under Rule 3.850, requiring the attachment of portions of the record conclusively refuting the claim or an evidentiary hearing. See Monfiston v. State, 946 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Bronder v. State, 929 So. 2d 615, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Anthony v. State, 927 So. 2d 1084, 1086 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). We roundly reject the state’s argument that appellant has demonstrated no prejudice by trial counsel’s failure to seek suppression of the statements because the…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw