Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Freeman v. Stategreen2 sentences2018See Freeman v. State , 761 So.2d 1055 , 1061 (Fla. 2000) ("[A] defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief motion unless (1) the motion, files, and records *723 in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, or (2) the motion or a particular claim is legally insufficient."). 2014However, as the State properly concedes, because the waiver of rights and plea agreement attached to the trial court’s order does not conclusively refute Warren’s claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress his pre-arrest statements to police, see Zanchez v. State, 84 So.3d 466, 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (holding general plea colloquy did not address specific issue of alleged illegal search), we reverse the summary denial of Ground One and remand for attachment of portions of the record refuting that claim or for an evidentiary hearing, see Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, | 5 | 5 |
Spears v. Stategreen2 sentences2007"The burden is on the postconviction court to attach portions of the record refuting the rule 3.800(a) claim." Spears v. State, 920 So.2d 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). 2006P. 9.141(b)(2)(D); Spears v. State, 920 So.2d 187, 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“The burden is on the postconviction court to attach portions of the record refuting the rule 3.800(a) claim.”). | 2 | 3 |
Warren v. Stategreen1 sentence2015See Warren v. State, 149 So.3d 738, 738 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (citing Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1061 (Fla.2000)). | 1 | 1 |
ZANCHEZ v. Stategreen1 sentence2014However, as the State properly concedes, because the waiver of rights and plea agreement attached to the trial court’s order does not conclusively refute Warren’s claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress his pre-arrest statements to police, see Zanchez v. State, 84 So.3d 466, 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (holding general plea colloquy did not address specific issue of alleged illegal search), we reverse the summary denial of Ground One and remand for attachment of portions of the record refuting that claim or for an evidentiary hearing, see Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, | 1 | 1 |
Ward v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See Ward v. State, 865 So.2d 669 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). | 1 | 1 |
Burke v. Stategreen1 sentence2006See Burke v. State, 855 So.2d 207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). | 1 | 1 |
Arroyo v. Stategreen1 sentence1998See e.g., Arroyo v. State, 673 So.2d 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)(reversing denial of 3.850 motion where order did not include record *1052 attachments to refute claim that trial court failed to a elicit factual basis for the crime to which defendant entered plea); Franklin v. State, 645 So.2d 166 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)(considering 3.850 claim alleging no factual basis for plea and remanding for attachments refuting claim, or for evidentiary hearing). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jeffersongreen1 sentence1997See also State v. Jefferson, 665 So.2d 1057 (Fla.1996). | 1 | 1 |
Sullivan v. Stategreen1 sentence1996See Sullivan v. State, 674 So.2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Matthews v. State, 664 So.2d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); McClain v. State, 629 So.2d 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Black v. Stategreen1 sentence1996See Black v. State, 587 So.2d 595 (Fla. 2d DCA1991). | 1 | 1 |
Littlejohn v. Stategreen1 sentence1994See Littlejohn v. State, 616 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Thompkins v. State
green
1 sentence2014Id. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Parker v. State
green
1 sentence2008Parker v. State, 921 So.2d 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Davis v. State
green
1 sentence2008Id. at 614 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Felder v. State
green
1 sentence2006Felder v. State, 828 So.2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Franklin v. State
green
1 sentence1998See e.g., Arroyo v. State, 673 So.2d 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)(reversing denial of 3.850 motion where order did not include record *1052 attachments to refute claim that trial court failed to a elicit factual basis for the crime to which defendant entered plea); Franklin v. State, 645 So.2d 166 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)(considering 3.850 claim alleging no factual basis for plea and remanding for attachments refuting claim, or for evidentiary hearing). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Matthews v. State
green
1 sentence1996See Sullivan v. State, 674 So.2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Matthews v. State, 664 So.2d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); McClain v. State, 629 So.2d 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Hastings v. State
green
1 sentence1996In Hastings v. State, 670 So.2d 1176 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), we stated that “[t]he state’s supplementation of the order with portions of the record is insufficient to support the trial court’s summary denial.” Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief and remand this cause for either attachment of portions of the record refuting his claim for relief or for an evidentiary hearing. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
McClain v. State
green
1 sentence1996See Sullivan v. State, 674 So.2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Matthews v. State, 664 So.2d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); McClain v. State, 629 So.2d 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Thomas v. State
green
1 sentence1994Because we adopt the requirement on orders summarily denying relief on rule 3.800(a) motions, that the trial court must attach portions of the record sufficient to refute allegations of a facially sufficient motion to correct an illegal sentence, see Thomas v. State, 634 So.2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), we reverse and remand for further proceedings. [1] Should the trial court on *669 remand again determine that the motion should be denied, the order of denial must be supported by portions of the record refuting the claim for additional jail time credit. | 1 | 1994–1994 |