ROSA E. TORREALBA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Rosa Torrealba appealed the trial court's summary denial of her postconviction relief motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, affirmed the denial on most claims but reversed and remanded on two specific points where the record did not conclusively refute her arguments regarding victim injury scoring and lesser included offenses.
The court affirmed the denial on all points except nine and twelve. On point nine (victim injury scoring error), the record does not conclusively refute the claim due to missing sentencing documents. On point twelve (lesser included offenses error), the record does not conclusively refute the claim because the State's argument about waiver lacks support in the cited transcript, and other transcript portions show jury instructions on lesser included offenses occurred.
[1] A postconviction motion must be reversed on appeal unless the record conclusively shows the appellant is entitled to no relief.
[2] A trial court may rely on record excerpts attached to a party's pleadings when ruling on a postconviction motion.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“On appeal from a summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion, this court must reverse unless the postconviction record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief.”
Establishes the standard of review for Rule 3.850 postconviction motions on appeal, placing the burden on the trial court to conclusively refute claims.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTorrealba filed a postconviction relief motion raising multiple claims. The trial court summarily denied the motion without providing detailed conside…
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 Summary Denial cases and more on FLexlaw
On Rehearing Granted
COPE, C.J.
On consideration of the State’s motion for rehearing, the court withdraws its previous opinion and substitutes the following opinion.
Rosa Elena Torrealba appeals an order denying her motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
In the trial court, the State filed an amended response to the motion of defendant-appellant Torrealba. The trial court summarily denied the motion and defendant-appellant Torrealba has appealed.
The record conclusively refutes all of the defendant’s claims except points nine and twelve. We affirm on all points except nine and twelve.
We return the matter to the trial court for further consideration on points nine and twelve. On appeal from a summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion, this court must reverse unless the postconviction record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D). On point nine the defendant claims an error in scoring victim injury. The record now before us does not contain the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, verdict, or sentencing order, and does not conclusively refute the defendant’s claim.
On point twelve, the defendant appears to claim that there is an error on the verdict form regarding lesser included offenses. The State’s amended response on point twelve argued that the defendant waived lesser included offenses, but the cited portion of the transcript contains no such waiver. Further, the trial transcript elsewhere reflects that the jury was instructed on lesser included offenses. In the absence of relevant record excerpts, the present record does not conclusively refute this claim.
For the stated reasons we reverse the order as to points nine and twelve and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court again enters a summary denial, it must attach as part of the postconviction record the record excerpts conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to any relief. Otherwise the court must conduct an evidentiary hearing.
The defendant argues that the order now before us must be reversed in its entirety because the trial court failed to attach the transcript excerpts to the order denying relief. This argument is without merit. When the trial court denied the defendant’s motion, the court directed in its order that the clerk of the circuit court transmit as part of the postconviction record several documents, including the State’s amended response to the defendant’s postconviction motion.
The current version of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2)(A) allows the trial court to rely on record excerpts attached to the parties’ pleadings. In this case the State filed an amended response and attached excerpts from the trial transcript and pretrial hearings. In that situation the trial court does not have to reattach the same excerpts to the court’s order. See id. (stating that postconviction record for a summary denial includes “copies of the motion, response, reply, order on the motion, motion for rehearing, response, reply, order on the motion for rehearing, and attachments to any of the foregoing, together with the certified copy of the notice of appeal.”); see also Rodriguez v. State, 919 So. 2d 576, 577 n. * (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Bryant v. State, 944 So. 2d 1016, 1017 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). The record excerpts attached to the State’s amended trial court response were properly considered by the trial court, and this court.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bryant v. State, 944 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Rodriguez v. State, 919 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)