A record of the proceedings shall be made and preserved. All rules and statutes applicable
in civil proceedings shall apply except that pretrial discovery proceedings shall
be available only upon order of the court. The court may receive proof by affidavits,
depositions, oral testimony, or other evidence and may, if deemed appropriate, order
the applicant be brought before it for the hearing. If the court finds in favor of
the applicant, it shall enter an appropriate order with respect to the conviction
or sentence in the former proceedings, and any supplementary orders as to rearraignment,
retrial, custody, bail, discharge, correction of sentence, or other matters that may
be necessary and proper. The court shall make specific findings of fact, and state
expressly its conclusions of law, relating to each issue presented. This order is
a final judgment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases, 1977–2016 · leading case:
Tempest v. State, 141 A.3d 677 (R.I. 2016).
Tempest v. State, 141 A.3d 677 (R.I. 2016).
· cites it 6× “See G.L.1956 § 10-9.1-7 ("The court shall make specific findings of fact, and state expressly its conclusions of law, relating to each issue presented.”
Ferrell v. Wall, 889 A.2d 177 (R.I. 2005).
· cites it 4× “See G.L.1956 § 10-9.1-7 ("[a]ll rules and statutes applicable in civil proceedings shall apply”).”
Palmigiano v. Mullen, 377 A.2d 242 (R.I. 1977).
· cites it 4× “IV The trial justice, in response to petitioner’s contention below that the state had the burden of proving consent, noted that §10-9.1-7 of the Post Conviction Remedy Act provides that “[a]ll rules and statutes applicable in civil proceedings shall apply,” and consequently…”
Brown v. State, 964 A.2d 516 (R.I. 2009).
· cites it 3× “” It is true that G.L.1956 § 10-9.1-7 requires a court to “make specific findings of fact, and state expressly its conclusions of law, relating to each issue presented.”
Brown v. State, 32 A.3d 901 (R.I. 2011).
· cites it 2× “1 of title 10, and more particularly § 10-9.1-7, which governs a hearing justice’s procedural methodology upon review of an application for postconviction relief.”
State v. Laurence, 18 A.3d 512 (R.I. 2011).
· cites it 2× “” Section 10-9.1-7. Based on the dearth of evidence before the trial justice and Laurence’s abdication of the investigator funds, it was not an abuse of discretion for the trial justice to conclude that Laurence had not “open[ed] the door” to deposition discovery.”
Doyle v. State, 411 A.2d 907 (R.I. 1980).
· cites it 2× “1-6(c) which provides that: “The court may grant a motion by either party for summary disposition of the application when it appears from the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions and agreements of fact, together with any affidavits submitted, that…”
State v. Duggan, 414 A.2d 788 (R.I. 1980).
“1-9 and § 10-9.1-7 which provides in part, “All rules and statutes applicable in civil proceedings shall apply * * 7 .”
Palmigiano v. State, 387 A.2d 1382 (R.I. 1978).
“1956 (1969 Reenactment) §10-9.1-7. Palmigiano v. Mullen, 119 R.I.”
Carillo v. Moran, 463 A.2d 178 (R.I. 1983).
“General Laws 1956 (1969 Reenactment) §§ 10-9.1-7 and 10-9.1-9, as enacted by P.”
Anthony Lipscomb v. State of Rhode Island, 144 A.3d 299 (R.I. 2016).
“establish that his attorneys’ representations were constitutionally deficient. Rhode Island’s postconviction remedy is set forth in G.”
Sifuentes v. State, 43 A.3d 49 (R.I. 2012).
“Pursuant to § 10-9.1-7 and § 10-9.1-9, this order constitutes a final judgment appealable to this Court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.