CRUZ
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 2d DCA | 2026-01-07
No. 2025-1895
LaRose, J., Lucas, C.J., Morris, J., Bulone, J.
2026 FL 134 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second 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 postconviction DNA testing motion that is facially insufficient under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853(b)(1) and (3) may be summarily denied.


Headnotes

[1] A postconviction motion for DNA testing under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853 that is facially insufficient may be summarily denied without prejudice to filing a…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Joel Adrian Cruz filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853 motion for postconviction DNA testing. The postconviction court found the motion was…

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
Lucas

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JOEL ADRIAN CRUZ,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 2D2025-1895

January 7, 2026

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Joseph Anthony Bulone, Judge.

Joel Adrian Cruz, pro se. LaROSE, Judge. Joel Adrian Cruz appeals the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853 motion for postconviction DNA testing. The postconviction court found that the motion was facially insufficient. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.853(b)(1), (3). We agree and affirm. Our affirmance is without prejudice to any right Mr. Cruz might have to file a facially sufficient rule 3.853 motion. See Bing v. State, 268 So. 3d 192, 193 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018). Affirmed.

2

LUCAS, C.J., and MORRIS, J., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw