Callins v. State

657 So. 2d 31, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6583, 1995 WL 360294
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 16, 1995·No. No. 95-1660·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court summarily denied appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief filed [32] pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, but failed to attach those portions of the record conclusively showing that he is entitled to no relief. We are unable to ascertain whether appellant is presently incarcerated for the offense from which appellant seeks relief. Additionally, the facts underlying this appeal may entitle appellant to relief under Wall v. State, 525 So.2d 486 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), and the trial court’s order fails to disclose whether the trial court considered Wall when it determined appellant’s motion to be untimely filed.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand this cause to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing or for attachment of those parts of the record showing that appellant is not entitled to relief. See Taylor v. State, 583 So.2d 823 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Gentry v. State, 464 So.2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DELL, C.J., and GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.

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

Callins v. State, 657 So. 2d 31, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6583, 1995 WL 360294 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

657 So. 2d 31 (Callins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gentry v. State
464 So. 2d 659 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Taylor v. State
583 So. 2d 823 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Wall v. State
525 So. 2d 486 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)