Butts v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Butts v. State

648 So. 2d 321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 231, 1995 WL 15552

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 18, 1995

DocketNo. 94-1676

StatusPublished

This text of 648 So. 2d 321 (Butts 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

Butts v. State, 648 So. 2d 321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 231, 1995 WL 15552 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court summarily denied appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion. The record on appeal does not indicate that the attachments to the state’s response were before the trial court when it denied the 3.800(a) motion; nor were they attached to the order of denial.

In McCray v. State, 633 So.2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), this court reversed the trial court’s summary denial of a rule 3.800(a) motion, stating that “[t]he order of summary denial should have contained those portions of the record necessary to support the trial court’s order. The state’s supplementation of the order with portions of the record is insufficient to support the trial court’s summary denial.” Id. (emphasis added) (citations omitted). We instructed the trial court to “attach those portions of the record supporting its order.” Id.

Based on McCray, we reverse and remand for attachment of portions of the record to the order of denial.

GLICKSTEIN, FARMER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court summarily denied appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion. The record on appeal does not indicate that the attachments to the state’s response were before the trial court when it denied the 3.800(a) motion; nor were they attached to the order of denial.

In McCray v. State, 633 So.2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), this court reversed the trial court’s summary denial of a rule 3.800(a) motion, stating that “[t]he order of summary denial should have contained those portions of the record necessary to support the trial court’s order. The state’s supplementation of the order with portions of the record is insufficient to support the trial court’s summary denial.” Id. (emphasis added) (citations omitted). We instructed the trial court to “attach those portions of the record supporting its order.” Id.

Based on McCray, we reverse and remand for attachment of portions of the record to the order of denial.

GLICKSTEIN, FARMER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

648 So. 2d 321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 231, 1995 WL 15552, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butts-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack