JEROME KIMBROUGH, 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 denial of the motion for post-conviction relief because the appellant failed to provide the correct transcript to support his claim.
Appellant sought post-conviction relief, arguing his guilty plea lacked a factual basis. He relied on the transcript from the post-conviction hearing …
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 Transcript Of Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal from a denial of appellant’s Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion, appellant’s primary grievance is that his plea of guilty to the offense of reckless display of a deadly weapon is not supported by the trial court eliciting a “factual basis” as dictated by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.170(j).1
In support of this argument, appellant argues in his brief:
“From a reading of the transcript of record it is obvious that the Appellant was both bewildered and dumbfounded during both the arrest and his initial appearance in court where he entered his plea of guilty . . . . ”
The foregoing transcript relied upon is that developed during the instant hearing upon appellant’s collateral attack. As cogently pointed out by the State, appellant has not benefited this court with a transcript of the trial proceedings which resulted in the plea of guilty which he now seeks to attack collaterally.
AFFIRMED.
RAWLS, Acting C. J., and MILLS and SMITH, JJ., concur. . Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975).