Creel v. State

769 So. 2d 450, 2000 WL 1468288
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 4, 2000
Docket4D00-3045
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 769 So. 2d 450 (Creel 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
Creel v. State, 769 So. 2d 450, 2000 WL 1468288 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

769 So.2d 450 (2000)

Curtis CREEL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D00-3045.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

October 4, 2000.

Curtis Creel, Belle Glade, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Curtis Creel appeals the order that summarily denied his postconviction motion. The trial court adopted the state's response that the motion did not include a proper oath, but did not follow the state's recommendation that denial be without *451 prejudice to file a new motion that cures the defect.

We affirm without prejudice for Creel to file a new motion that is properly sworn. This motion is to be filed no later than thirty days after the issuance of the mandate in this appeal. We refer Creel to the wording of the oaths contained in the model form set out in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.986.

DELL, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Fletcher v. State
949 So. 2d 328 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)
Katwaroo v. State
837 So. 2d 612 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
769 So. 2d 450, 2000 WL 1468288, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/creel-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.