Fuller v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fuller v. State

444 So. 2d 592, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11570

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 3, 1984

DocketNo. 83-2138

StatusPublished

This text of 444 So. 2d 592 (Fuller 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

Fuller v. State, 444 So. 2d 592, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11570 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHEB, Acting Chief Judge.

James Fuller, Jr. challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his motion seeking postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

Fuller was convicted of several offenses and sentenced on December 29, 1982. He contends that some of the crimes for which he was convicted may be lesser included offenses of his other convictions. This allegation, if true, would entitle him to relief under Rule 3.850. However, it is impossible for us to determine the merit of his contentions without the aid of, at least, the charging documents), and possibly other portions of the record. Watkins v. State, 413 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Therefore, it was error for the trial court to fail to either conduct an evidentiary hearing or to attach the necessary supporting documents to its order.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of Fuller’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand the court may either again summarily deny the motion and attach to its order those portions of the record which conclusively show defendant is not entitled to relief, or it may hold an evidentiary hearing and then rule on the ground alleged in Fuller’s motion. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. See also Jones v. State, 421 So.2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and VanBever v. State, 405 So.2d 474 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). To obtain further review Fuller must appeal the new ruling of the trial court.

SCHOONOVER and LEHAN, JJ., concur.

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

SCHEB, Acting Chief Judge.

James Fuller, Jr. challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his motion seeking postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

Fuller was convicted of several offenses and sentenced on December 29, 1982. He contends that some of the crimes for which he was convicted may be lesser included offenses of his other convictions. This allegation, if true, would entitle him to relief under Rule 3.850. However, it is impossible for us to determine the merit of his contentions without the aid of, at least, the charging documents), and possibly other portions of the record. Watkins v. State, 413 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Therefore, it was error for the trial court to fail to either conduct an evidentiary hearing or to attach the necessary supporting documents to its order.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of Fuller’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand the court may either again summarily deny the motion and attach to its order those portions of the record which conclusively show defendant is not entitled to relief, or it may hold an evidentiary hearing and then rule on the ground alleged in Fuller’s motion. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. See also Jones v. State, 421 So.2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and VanBever v. State, 405 So.2d 474 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). To obtain further review Fuller must appeal the new ruling of the trial court.

SCHOONOVER and LEHAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

444 So. 2d 592, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fuller-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack