ZACHARY CARR, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ROTHENBERG, Judge.
This is an appeal of an order summarily denying a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). On appeal from a summary denial, 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).
Because the record now before us fails to make the required showing, we reverse the order and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court again enters an order summarily denying the postconviction motion, the court shall attach record excerpts conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to any relief.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dumenigo v. State, 988 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…es, if the defendant is otherwise subject to deportation pursuant to another criminal conviction). In essence, Dumenigo argues that Prieto has no application post State v. Green, 944 So. 2d 208, 210 (Fla.2006). We disagree. See Ojurongbe v. State, 973 So. 2d 621, 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (recognizing Prieto’s continued application); see also Forrest v. State, 988 So. 2d 38, 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (observing that the burden was on the movant to establish that the plea in the case under attack was the only basi…
-
State v. de Armas, 988 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…efore the filing of the motion to vacate. Nor did Green eliminate the right of the State to challenge such a motion by proving that the defendant is removable from the United States on grounds other than the plea in question. See Ojurongbe v. State, 973 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). In this case, De Armas was notably vague as to when he became aware that his 1992 plea made him subject to adverse immigration consequences, and he did not identify the Immigration Court’s grounds for seeking removal. The State…
-
Ruiz v. State, 18 So. 3d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…termination is within the exclusive discretion of federal offi [*661] cials. 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (2000). Rosas [v. State, 991 So. 2d 1003, 1003-04 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) ]. But cf. Dumenigo v. State, 988 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Ojurongbe v. State, 973 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Rehearing denied.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence