JON PAUL BURNETT, 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 reversed the denial of a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion because the trial court failed to attach record materials supporting its summary denial of ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
A postconviction court denying a Rule 3.850 motion must either attach record portions that conclusively refute the claims or conduct an evidentiary hearing on claims not conclusively refuted.
[1] A postconviction court denying a Rule 3.850 motion must attach to its order those portions of the record that conclusively refute the defendant's claims, or conduct an ev…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBurnett filed a postconviction motion alleging six claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The postconviction court found the claims facially suf…
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 Refutation of Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
WALLACE, Judge.
Jon Paul Burnett challenges the post-conviction court’s order that denied his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The postconviction court initially determined that the six claims of ineffective assistance of counsel alleged in Burnett’s motion were facially sufficient and ordered the State to respond. The State filed a seventeen-page response that is replete with references to the record. However, the State’s response contains no record attachments to support its detailed rebuttal of Burnett’s claims. In its final order denying Burnett’s motion, the postconviction court merely adopted and incorporated by reference the State’s response and failed to append any record attachments to its order. Thus the order does not support the summary denial of Burnett’s motion. See Loomis v. State, 691 So. 2d 34, 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Flores v. State, 662 So. 2d 1350, 1351-52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Accordingly, we reverse the postconviction court’s order and remand for reconsideration of Burnett’s motion. If the postconviction court again denies Burnett’s motion, it must either attach to its order those portions of the record that conclusively refute his claims, or as to any claim or claims that are not conclusively refuted by the record, conduct an evidentiary hearing.
Reversed and remanded.
SALCINES and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gisi v. State, 135 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…rested in Bradford County on a Pinellas County warrant or detainer. The court further found that because the Bradford County jail credit claim involved disputed issues of fact, it could only be resolved pursuant to rule 3.850. See Montague v. State, 933 So. 2d 1282, 1283 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Mendez v. State, 42 So. 3d 848, 848 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). The postconviction court neither addressed the claims on the merits nor treated the motion as though it were properly filed under rule 3.850 because the motion did n…
-
Brandan Gatlin v. State, 24 So. 3d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…s and remand with directions to the postconviction court either to grant Gatlin an evidentiary hearing or, if the record refutes a claim, to attach the appropriate documents to the order of denial. See Gatlin I, 940 So. 2d at 1275; Burnett v. State, 933 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). B. Claims denied because they were legally insufficient These claims include those denied solely on this basis (footnotes 4 and 5, above) and those denied on this and the additional ground that they were refuted by the record (…
-
Phillips v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…losing argument and did not include the testimony or evidence being discussed in the statements. Moreover, the postconviction court did not append any records refuting the claim or discuss its rationale for denying the claim. See Burnett v. State, 933 So. 2d 1282, 1282 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ("[T]he postconviction court merely adopted and incorporated by reference the State's response and failed to append any record attachments to its order. Thus the order does not support the summary denial of Burnett's motio…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Flores v. State, 662 So. 2d 1350 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Loomis v. State, 691 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)