HENRY LAMAR DAVIS, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Florida appellate court reversed in part and remanded a trial court's summary denial of a successive Rule 3.850 postconviction motion because the court failed to attach copies of the prior motion and order as required by procedural rule, though it affirmed the denial as to claims related to the original proceedings.
A trial court must attach copies of prior Rule 3.850 motions and resulting orders when denying a successive postconviction motion, and failure to do so requires reversal and remand even if the motion is properly deniable as successive.
[1] Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(h)(2) requires trial courts to attach copies of prior postconviction motions and resulting orders when ruling on successive Rule…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavis filed an initial Rule 3.850 motion in June 2014, which was denied in November 2014 without appeal. Six months later, Davis filed a second Rule 3…
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 Procedural Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
Henry Lamar Davis, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. Davis filed an initial Rule 3.850 motion in June of 2014. That motion was denied on November 18, 2014, and Davis did not appeal the denial. Six months later, Davis filed another Rule 3.850 motion, which was also denied.1
*685The trial court denied the motion in part as impermissibly successive, correctly noting that Davis neither labeled the motion as successive nor justified the failure to raise the asserted grounds in his prior motion. The trial court failed, however, to attach a copy of the prior motions and orders in support of its ruling as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(h)(2). The State concedes this was error. We reverse and remand for attachment of the prior Rule 3.850 motion and the resulting order as it relates to Davis’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel in his violation-of-probation cases. We affirm as to the claims related to the original proceedings and alleging trial court error.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.
SAWAYA, COHEN and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Murray Hilton v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2023)
-
Murray Hilton v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)