Elma v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Elma v. State

895 So. 2d 1262, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3072, 2005 WL 545194

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 9, 2005

DocketNo. 3D04-2597

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 895 So. 2d 1262 (Elma 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

Elma v. State, 895 So. 2d 1262, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3072, 2005 WL 545194 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Paul Emile Elma appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the trial court did not attach documentation conclusively refuting the defendant’s allegations, we remand this case to the trial court with directions to issue an amended order explaining why the original order was “without prejudice,” attach documentation that refutes the defendant’s claim, or provide the defendant with the twenty-four (24) additional days credit for time served in case no. 00-41144. See Davis v. State, 869 So.2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Wallen v. State, 860 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Bohler v. State, 747 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

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

PER CURIAM.

Paul Emile Elma appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the trial court did not attach documentation conclusively refuting the defendant’s allegations, we remand this case to the trial court with directions to issue an amended order explaining why the original order was “without prejudice,” attach documentation that refutes the defendant’s claim, or provide the defendant with the twenty-four (24) additional days credit for time served in case no. 00-41144. See Davis v. State, 869 So.2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Wallen v. State, 860 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Bohler v. State, 747 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

895 So. 2d 1262, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3072, 2005 WL 545194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elma-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack