ARMANDO MAISONAVE, 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 appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of a petition for post-conviction relief, finding the grounds alleged were insufficient and refuted by the record, thus not requiring a hearing.
The trial court was not required to hold a hearing on the merits because the grounds for relief alleged in the petition were totally insufficient and refuted by the record.
“It is established that the trial court need not conduct a hearing on the merits when the grounds of the petition are totally insufficient or are refuted by the record.”
Establishes the legal standard for when a post-conviction relief hearing is not required.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant sought post-conviction relief, alleging police mistreatment and failure by the Public Defender to provide a trial transcript. The trial …
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 Hearing On The Merits cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant brings for review the trial court’s denial of his petition filed pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix. The main thrust of the appeal is that the trial court should have set the petition for a hearing on the merits rather than denying it upon an examination of the record.
It is established that the trial court need not conduct a hearing on the merits when the grounds of the petition are totally insufficient or are refuted by the record. State v. Weeks, Fla.1964, 166 So.2d 892.
In the petition before us the grounds for relief alleged are as follows:
(1) That the appellant was subject to an inhuman attitude of the police;
(2) That the Office of the Public Defender did not forward to appellant a copy of the transcript of his trial.
There is no allegation, nor anything in the record, to suggest that the petition was deprived of the substance of a fair trial. See Marti v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 506.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bohn v. State, 354 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…rial court need not conduct a hearing on the merits when the grounds of the motion to vacate are totally insufficient or are refuted by the record after the required examination thereof. State v. Weeks, 166 So. 2d 892 (Fla.1964); Maisonave v. State, 171 So. 2d 443 (Fla.3d DCA 1965). Examining Bohn’s motion to vacate in light of the above principles of law, we find that grounds 1, 2 and 5 are clearly refuted by the record. Turning next to the remaining grounds 3 and 4, we note that these allegations are unsup…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Weeks, 166 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1964)
- Marti v. State, 163 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)