ARMAND COOK
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 6th DCA | 2026-05-08
No. 2023-3205
2026 FL 5419 Florida District Court of Appeal, Sixth District (2026)

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 trial court's summary denial of a successive Rule 3.850 motion must comply with mandatory procedures under Rule 3.850(h)(1)-(5) and (j)(2), and if it does not, the denial must be reversed and remanded.


Headnotes

[1] A summary denial of a successive Rule 3.850 motion must comply with the mandatory procedures of Florida Criminal Rule 3.850(h)(1)-(5) and (j)(2), including discussion of…

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

Key Quotes

“On appeal from the denial of relief, unless the record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief, the order must be reversed and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief.”

Court applied Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2)(D) standard for reversal of summary denial

Facts & Procedural History

Armand Cook appealed the trial court's summary denial of his Amended Second/Successive Rule 3.850 Motion. The trial court's order denied the motion wi…

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

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

Case No. 6D2023-3205 Lower Tribunal No. 20-MM-4424

ARMAND COOK, Appellant,

V.

STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the County Court for Orange County. Adam McGinnis, Judge.

May 8, 2026

PER CURIAM.

Cook appeals the summary denial of his "Amended Second/Successive 3850 Motion Based on New Grounds, Facts, Merits" (the "Motion"). The trial court's order states that the Motion is denied. The order does not, however, discuss the allegations in the Motion, explain the reasons for the denial, or have any portion of the case files and records attached. Therefore, we reverse and remand. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D) (“On appeal from the denial of relief, unless the record shows

conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief, the order must be reversed and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief."); see also Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(h)(1)–(5) (establishing mandatory procedures for summarily denying a motion); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(j)(2) (establishing mandatory procedures for dismissing or denying a second or successive motion). On remand, the trial court shall either enter an order summarily denying or dismissing the Motion in accordance with rule 3.850(h)(1)–(5), (j)(2), or proceed in accordance with the other provisions of rule 3.850.

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

NARDELLA, WHITE and MIZE, JJ., concur.

Armand Cook, Taylor, Michigan, pro se.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw