Capers v. State

31 So. 3d 918, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4202, 2010 WL 1222709
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 31, 2010·No. 3D10-514·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Vincent Capers a/k/a Vincent Romel Capers, appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion to correct illegal sentence as to amount of credit for time served under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). On appeal from a summary denial, this Court must reverse unless the post-conviction record shows conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D).

The defendant has raised a facially sufficient claim for rule 3.800(a) relief that the trial court, by summarily denying the motion, has failed to conclusively refute. Because the record now before us fails to make the required showing, we reverse the order and remand for further proceedings. On remand, if the trial court again enters an order denying the post-conviction motion, the trial court shall attach written portions of the record conclusively refuting the defendant’s claim. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D) (requiring reversal by this Court unless the record shows conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

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

Capers v. State, 31 So. 3d 918, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4202, 2010 WL 1222709 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

31 So. 3d 918 (Capers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

MONTESINO v. State
31 So. 3d 918 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)