Black v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Black v. State

41 So. 3d 285, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 8944, 2010 WL 2472189

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 21, 2010

Docket1D09-4279

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 41 So. 3d 285 (Black v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Black v. State, 41 So. 3d 285, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 8944, 2010 WL 2472189 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Otto Black appeals an order denying his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The motion raised eight grounds for relief premised on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court held a full evidentiary hearing and thereafter entered its order denying relief in toto. We affirm the order as to Grounds One through Six and Ground Eight, but reverse as to Ground Seven. Although the court held an evidentiary hearing on the motion, it denied Ground Seven solely because the trial record refutes that claim. But the court failed to attach to the order those portions of the record supporting the denial. We therefore reverse and remand for the lower court to attach such parts of the trial record conclusively refuting the allegations made in Ground Seven. See Gatlin v. State, 24 So.3d 743, 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing and remanding where postconviction court held hearing on some 3.850 claims and denied others as *286 refuted by the record but failed to attach relevant portions of the record to denial order).

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

KAHN, ROWE, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Otto Black appeals an order denying his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The motion raised eight grounds for relief premised on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court held a full evidentiary hearing and thereafter entered its order denying relief in toto. We affirm the order as to Grounds One through Six and Ground Eight, but reverse as to Ground Seven. Although the court held an evidentiary hearing on the motion, it denied Ground Seven solely because the trial record refutes that claim. But the court failed to attach to the order those portions of the record supporting the denial. We therefore reverse and remand for the lower court to attach such parts of the trial record conclusively refuting the allegations made in Ground Seven. See Gatlin v. State, 24 So.3d 743, 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing and remanding where postconviction court held hearing on some 3.850 claims and denied others as *286 refuted by the record but failed to attach relevant portions of the record to denial order).

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

KAHN, ROWE, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 So. 3d 285, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 8944, 2010 WL 2472189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/black-v-state-fladistctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack