ARTHUR WILLIAMS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court's summary denial of a postconviction relief motion cannot be upheld when the court relies on portions of trial transcripts that are not included in the appellate record.
[1] When a trial court denies a postconviction relief motion by referencing portions of trial transcripts, those portions must be included in the appellate record to permit m…
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 intelligenceArthur Williams appealed the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(b)(1), claiming new…
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 Summary Denial Of Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
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
ARTHUR WILLIAMS,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D18-2065
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed December 7, 2018
3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Kim Shepard, Judge.
Arthur Williams, Bristol, pro se.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison
L.
Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Arthur Williams, appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief alleging newly discovered evidence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(b)(1). In his motion, Appellant argues that the affidavits of two inmates who allegedly witnessed the murders for which Appellant was convicted are newly discovered and that the inmates’ testimonies would have led to an acquittal at trial.
2 The trial court summarily denied the motion finding that the affidavits are not exculpatory and referenced portions of the trial transcripts. However, the portions of the transcripts designated by the trial court do not appear in our record. We are therefore unable to review the trial court’s denial. See Fowler v. State, 67 So. 3d 1073, 1074 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). As such, we reverse and remand for the trial court to attach records that conclusively refute Appellant’s allegations or to hold an evidentiary hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BERGER, EISNAUGLE and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Eugenia Bowen & the Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 1985)
- Fowler v. State, 67 So. 3d 1073 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)