REYNELDON J. DAVIS
v.
STATE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2018-08-27
No. 18-1475
Jordan, J., Sawaya, J., Palmer, J., Eisnaugle, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2018)

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

The trial court's denial of post-conviction relief under Rule 3.850 was affirmed.


Headnotes

[1] A claim in a Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief petition that is facially insufficient may be subject to remand for an opportunity to amend rather than outright dismissal.

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

Reyneldon J. Davis appealed a circuit court decision denying his Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief petition in Orange County.…

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
In The District Court Of Appeal Of The State Of Florida Fifth District Not Final Until Time Expires To File Motion For Rehearing And Disposition Thereof If Filed Reyneldon

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

REYNELDON J. DAVIS,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D18-1475

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Decision filed August 31, 2018 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, John E. Jordan, Judge. Spencer Rhodes, of R. Spencer Rhodes, PA, Orlando, for Appellant. No Appearance for Appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. SAWAYA and PALMER, JJ., concur. EISNAUGLE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.

2

CASE NO. 5D18-1475

EISNAUGLE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. I conclude that claim one is facially insufficient and therefore would remand that claim for an opportunity to amend. See Alvarez v. State, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D1632 (Fla. 5th DCA July 20, 2018). I would otherwise affirm.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw