DAVID RANDOLPH BLUE, 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.
David Randolph Blue appeals the summary denial of his post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The court reverses and remands, holding that the trial court must either attach record support refuting his claims or hold an evidentiary hearing, and must allow Blue to amend insufficiently pleaded claims.
The trial court erred in summarily denying the motion without either attaching appropriate portions of the record showing Blue was not entitled to relief or holding an evidentiary hearing. Blue is entitled to an opportunity to amend insufficiently pled claims pursuant to applicable case law and rules of appellate procedure.
[1] A trial court must attach record support to conclusively refute claims raised in a motion for post-conviction relief.
[2] A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a post-conviction relief claim unless the motion and record conclusively show the defendant is entitled to no relief…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the trial court was required to attach the portions of the record showing that Blue was not entitled to relief”
Establishes the procedural requirement that trial courts must support summary denials of post-conviction motions with appropriate record portions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBlue was charged with nine counts of sexual offenses including lewd and lascivious molestation, battery, and sexual battery in Monroe County circuit c…
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
David Randolph Blue appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We reverse and remand because the trial court failed to attach record support to conclusively refute Blue’s claims, and Blue is entitled to amend his insufficiently pled claims.
In case number 2005-CF-1086, in the circuit court in and for Monroe County, the State charged Blue by amended information with nine counts of lewd and lasciv*243ious molestation, lewd and lascivious battery, and three counts of sexual battery. At trial, the jury found him guilty as charged. The court sentenced Blue to life imprisonment on three counts and lower sentences on the remaining counts. Blue appealed his conviction, and this Court per curiam affirmed in Blue v. State, 2012 WL 560894 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).
Blue then filed a 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief, alleging six grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The trial court did not order the State to respond, and the trial court summarily denied Blue’s motion. In its order, the trial court did not attach any portions of the record conclusively refuting Blue’s claims. Blue moved for rehearing because he claimed that the issues he raised in his 3.850 motion were not raised in his direct appeal. The trial court denied the motion for rehearing, and Blue now appeals.
In its Answer Brief, the State concedes that the case should be remanded for either the trial court to attach the appropriate portions of the record showing that Blue is not entitled to relief or for the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing. We agree with the State that pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2)(D), the trial court was required to attach the portions of the record showing that Blue was not entitled to relief. See Wainwright v. State, 896 So.2d 695, 698 (Fla.2004) (noting that a defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a post-conviction relief claim unless the motion and record conclusively show that he or she is entitled to no relief or where the claim is legally insufficient).
In addition, we also agree with the State’s concession that Blue should be given the opportunity to amend any insufficiently pled claims, pursuant to Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754, 761-62 (Fla.2007). Accordingly, consistent with the State’s response, we reverse and remand for the trial court to either: attach the appropriate portions of the record showing that Blue is not entitled to relief, hold an evi-dentiary hearing if necessary, and if appropriate, give Blue an opportunity to amend his insufficiently pled claims.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cendejas v. State, 223 So. 3d 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…ef. See Hernandez v. State, 124 So. 3d 757, 762 (Fla. 2012). If appropriate, Mr. Cendejas should be given an opportunity to amend his claims to state a facially sufficient claim of prejudice. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(3); see also Blue v. State, 159 So. 3d 242, 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).…
-
Talley v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 2007)
- Wainwright v. State, 896 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2004)