TALVIN THOMPSON, 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.
The Fourth District reversed the trial court's summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion because the court failed to state its rationale or attach record materials refuting the claims, and remanded for proper consideration of all three claims.
A trial court must either state its rationale or attach specific record parts refuting each claim when summarily denying a Rule 3.850 motion without a hearing.
[1] A trial court must state its rationale or attach specific record materials refuting each claim when summarily denying a Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion without a hearin…
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 intelligence“To support summary denial without a hearing, a trial court must either state its rationale in its decision or attach those specific parts of the record that refute each claim presented in the motion.”
Establishing the standard for proper summary denial of post-conviction motions.
Thompson filed a timely Rule 3.850 motion raising three claims. The trial court summarily denied the motion without explanation, without ordering a st…
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 Record Attachments cases and more on FLexlaw
We reverse and remand the trial court’s order summarily denying appellant’s timely rule 3.850 motion. The trial court summarily denied the motion without explanation, without ordering a state response, and with no record attachments. It is well-settled that this is error. Campbell v. State, 155 So.3d 1252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015); Holley v. State, 67 So.3d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Simon v. State, 997 So.2d 490, 492 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Terry v. State, 970 So.2d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Dieudonne v. State, 958 So.2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “To support summary denial without a hearing, a trial court must either state its rationale in its decision or attach those specific parts of the record that refute each claim presented in the motion.” Anderson v. State, 627 So.2d 1170, 1171 (Fla.1993) (citation omitted).
The State concedes that remand is required for further proceedings as to claims one and three.
We disagree with the State’s argument that this Court already addressed appellant’s second claim in prior appeals. The issue presented in claim two was not addressed in either of appellant’s prior appeals. See Thompson v. State, 123 So.3d 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); Thompson v. State, 172 So.3d 884 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (table). On remand, the trial court shall address all of appellant’s claims.
Reversed and remanded for farther proceedings.
TAYLOR, GERBER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Eddie v. State, 233 So. 3d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)…We reverse and remand the order denying appellant's rule 3.850 motion because it was error for the trial court to summarily deny the motion “without explanation, without ordering a state response, and with no record attachments.” Thompson v. State, 202 So. 3d 927, 928 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). The State contends that the motion is legally insufficient and the trial court's order should be affirmed without prejudice. However, to the extent the denial of the motion was based on its legal insufficiency, the trial co…
Authorities Cited
- Anderson v. State, 627 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 1993)
- Dieudonne v. State, 958 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Ramad Terry v. State, 970 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Simon v. State, 997 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Talvin Thompson v. State, 123 So. 3d 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
- Holley v. State, 67 So. 3d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
- Russel Hunt v. State, 155 So. 3d 1252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
- Campbell v. State, 155 So. 3d 1252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)