Bolyea v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bolyea v. State

473 So. 2d 817, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1904, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15187

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 9, 1985

DocketNo. 84-2438

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 473 So. 2d 817 (Bolyea 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

Bolyea v. State, 473 So. 2d 817, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1904, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15187 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

RYDER, Chief Judge.

William E. Bolyea appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his motion, appellant alleged that his attorney was ineffective in that he failed to present certain evidence which may have affected the outcome of his trial. If these allegations are true, appellant might be entitled to post-conviction relief. The trial court, however, failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record which would refute these allegations.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of the appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, the trial court may either again summarily deny the motion and attach to its order those portions of the record which conclusively show that appellant is not entitled to relief, or hold an evidentiary hearing and then rule on the allegations raised in appellant’s motion. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. See also Jones v. State, 421 So.2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) and Van Bever v. State, 405 So.2d 474 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).

To obtain further review, any aggrieved party must appeal the new ruling of the trial court.

SCHEB and FRANK, JJ., concur.

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

RYDER, Chief Judge.

William E. Bolyea appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his motion, appellant alleged that his attorney was ineffective in that he failed to present certain evidence which may have affected the outcome of his trial. If these allegations are true, appellant might be entitled to post-conviction relief. The trial court, however, failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record which would refute these allegations.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of the appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, the trial court may either again summarily deny the motion and attach to its order those portions of the record which conclusively show that appellant is not entitled to relief, or hold an evidentiary hearing and then rule on the allegations raised in appellant’s motion. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. See also Jones v. State, 421 So.2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) and Van Bever v. State, 405 So.2d 474 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).

To obtain further review, any aggrieved party must appeal the new ruling of the trial court.

SCHEB and FRANK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

473 So. 2d 817, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1904, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bolyea-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack