Capers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Capers v. State

31 So. 3d 918, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4202, 2010 WL 1222709

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 31, 2010

Docket3D10-514

StatusPublished

This text of 31 So. 3d 918 (Capers 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

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 So. 3d 918, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4202, 2010 WL 1222709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/capers-v-state-fladistctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack