NAAMON JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
NAAMON JONES, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
234 So. 2d 379
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1970)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
Appellant appeals an order denying him relief under CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A. Appellant’s motion to vacate reads as follows:
“Comes Now Naamon Jones in Per Se. moves that this Honorable Court Vacate his Judgment and Sentence Pursuant to the Allowances of Criminal Procedure Rule #1.850. Petitioner Alleges, that he was given 6 months for Contempt of Court for making frivolous accusation, on or about November 16, 1968. and ask that he be granted a hearing.”
It patently appears from a reading of appellant’s motion that it is entirely deficient in that it does not state any grounds for relief under CrPR 1.850. This being true, the appellant was not entitled to a hearing on his motion and the trial court was eminently correct in denying the appellant’s motion without a hearing. Harper v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 168 So.2d 325.
Affirmed.
HOBSON, C. J., and LILES and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 819 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Jones v. State, 234 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970).…
-
Bright v. State, 257 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…tirely deficient because no grounds for relief under Rule 3.850 CrPR are stated, the appellant is not entitled to a hearing on his motion and the trial court is eminently correct in denying the motion without a hearing. Jones v. State, Fla.App.1970, 234 So. 2d 379. Appellant has not stated any legally sufficient grounds in this motion and error was not committed in denying an evi-dentiary hearing. See State v. Weeks, Fla.1964, 166 So. 2d 892, on remand 168 So. 2d 587; Henderson v. State, Fla.App.1965, 174 So.…
-
Evans v. State, 258 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed.2d 882 (1966). We hold that appellant was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his Rule 3.850 CrPR motion. Bright v. State, Fla.App.1972, 257 So. 2d 612, 3 D.C.A., opinion filed February 8, 1972; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1970, 234 So. 2d 379; and Plymale v. State, Fla.App.1967, 201 So. 2d 85. We conclude that the appeal demonstrates no reversible error and that it is without merit. The public defender’s motion to withdraw is granted and the order herein appealed is Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Harper v. State, 168 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)