JORGE PEREZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2011-05-11
No. 2D10-4838
CRENSHAW and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
60 So. 3d 566 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2011)

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.


Holding

A postconviction court must provide an explanation for denying a motion for postconviction relief and attach relevant record portions.


Facts & Procedural History

The postconviction court denied a motion to vacate plea, judgment, and sentence, stating it heard legal argument and made findings on the record. Howe…

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.


Opinion of the Court
WHATLEY, Judge.

WHATLEY, Judge.

Jorge Perez filed a motion to vacate plea, judgment, and sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The postconviction court issued an order and explained simply that the court heard legal argument at a September 3, 2010, hearing, made findings on the record at that hearing, and denied the motion under the totality of the circumstances. However, the postconviction court did not attach a copy of the transcript of this hearing to its order, and the clerk of the circuit court has verified that no transcript of this hearing has been filed in the circuit court record.

The problem this court encounters with the postconviction court’s order is not unlike that created when a postconviction judge simply stamps “denied” on a motion: we are left to review a barebones order without any insight into the court’s reasoning. See Dorsey v. State, 36 So.3d 690, 690 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Suleiman v. State, 861 So.2d 1175, 1175-1176 (Fla. 2d DCA *5672003). When denying a motion for post-conviction relief, the court “must provide an explanation of the reasons for the denial and attach any relevant portions of the record to support the denial.” Perry v. State, 872 So.2d 1017, 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

Accordingly, we reverse this order. On remand, if the postconviction court again summarily denies the motion, it shall enter an explanatory order and attach relevant portions of the record to refute Mr. Perez’s claim.

Reversed and remanded.

CRENSHAW and BLACK, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw