PAUL MEYER, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2011-09-16
No. 5D11-2430
ORFINGER, C.J., PALMER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.
69 So. 3d 1037 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2011) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The Appellant, Paul Meyer, Jr., seeks review of an order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief, which he filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court denied Appellant’s motion as successive, but did not attach to its denial order the previous motion and denial to demonstrate the suc-cessiveness of the motion. See Bryant v. *1038 State, 944 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Smith v. State, 719 So.2d 1017 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

The order summarily denying post conviction relief is therefore reversed. The cause is remanded to the trial court, either for attachment of the previous motion and denial that demonstrate the successiveness of Appellant’s motion or for consideration of the motion on its merits.

REVERSED.

ORFINGER, C.J., PALMER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Webb v. State, 208 So. 3d 830 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
    …viction court could have summarily dismissed this present motion, provided that it attached to its order copies of its prior denial order(s) on the merits and Webb’s earlier postconviction motion(s). See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(h)(2); Meyer v. State, 69 So. 3d 1037, 1038 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (reversing the summary denial of a successive rule 3.850 motion for trial court’s failure to attach to the denial order copies of the previous motion and denial order to demonstrate the successiveness of the motion). I see…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw