THOMAS WALTER SAUNDERS, 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.
Court reversed summary denial of Rule 3.850 motion to vacate because the record lacked transcripts of guilty plea and sentencing proceedings, making it impossible to conclusively determine appellant was entitled to no relief.
Summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion to vacate is improper when the record lacks transcripts of critical proceedings such as guilty plea and sentencing, preventing a conclusive determination that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.
[1] Summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion to vacate is improper when critical transcripts of guilty plea and sentencing proceedings are absent from the record, as the absence…
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“Summary denial of a motion under Rule 3.850 can be sustained only when the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.”
Establishing the standard for summary denial of Rule 3.850 motions
Appellant Saunders appealed a summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion to vacate from the Circuit Court of Brevard County. The record on appeal contain…
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 Sentencing Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals from an order of the Circuit Court of Brevard County summarily denying his motion to vacate pursuant to Rule 3.850 Fla.R.Crim.P. Summary denial of a motion under Rule 3.850 can be sustained only when the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. Merritt v. State, 165 So. 2d 245 (Fla.2d DCA 1964). The allegations of appellant’s motion, if true, would be sufficient to entitle him to post-conviction relief. The trial judge, in his order summarily denying appellant’s motion to vacate judgment, recites that the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.
Appellant in his Directions to the Clerk from making up the record-on-appeal asked that transcripts of all hearings be included. We have reviewed the record-on-appeal. No transcripts of any hearings are included. We must therefore assume that there were no such transcripts in the files and records of this case. Particularly crucial is the record of the proceedings before the trial court when appellant entered his plea of guilty and when he was sentenced. Without these transcripts we cannot say that the files and records of this case conclusively show that appellant is entitled to no relief. Williams v. State, 163 So. 2d 767 (Fla.2d DCA 1964).
REVERSED and REMANDED for an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s motion to vacate.
DOWNEY and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur. MAGER, C. J., concurs in conclusion only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allen v. State, 358 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)…uires that a trial court grant an evidentiary hearing to consider issues raised by a motion filed under the rule unless the motion and the files and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. Saunders v. State, 340 So. 2d 940 (4 DCA 1976). Appellant alleged in his motion that the trial court failed to grant him credit for all time served between the time he was charged and sentencing, a period of approximately two years according to the allegations of the motion. These…
Authorities Cited
- Cleveland Williams v. State, 163 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- PAN Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Botana, 163 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Merritt v. State, 165 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)