Henry L. Davis, Jr. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Henry L. Davis, Jr. v. State

192 So. 3d 684, 2016 WL 3125684, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 8460

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 3, 2016

Docket5D15-4138

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 192 So. 3d 684 (Henry L. Davis, Jr. 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

Henry L. Davis, Jr. v. State, 192 So. 3d 684, 2016 WL 3125684, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 8460 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Henry Lamar Davis, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. Davis filed an initial Rule 3.850 motion in June of 2014. That motion was denied on November 18, 2014, and Davis did not appeal the denial. Six months later, Davis filed another Rule 3.850 motion, which was also denied. 1

*685 The trial court denied the motion in part as impermissibly successive, correctly noting that Davis neither labeled the motion as successive nor justified the failure to raise the asserted grounds in his prior motion. The trial court failed, however, to attach a copy of the prior motions and orders in support of its ruling as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(h)(2). The State concedes this was error. We reverse and remand for attachment of the prior Rule 3.850 motion and the resulting order as it relates to Davis’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel in his violation-of-probation cases. We affirm as to the claims related to the original proceedings and alleging trial court error.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

SAWAYA, COHEN and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

1

. Davis’s initial brief is really no more than yet another Rule 3.850 motion alleging the *685 same forty-one grounds for relief. Twenty-four of these claims untimely challenged the trial court’s 2009 and 2011 judgments.

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

PER CURIAM.

Henry Lamar Davis, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. Davis filed an initial Rule 3.850 motion in June of 2014. That motion was denied on November 18, 2014, and Davis did not appeal the denial. Six months later, Davis filed another Rule 3.850 motion, which was also denied. 1

*685 The trial court denied the motion in part as impermissibly successive, correctly noting that Davis neither labeled the motion as successive nor justified the failure to raise the asserted grounds in his prior motion. The trial court failed, however, to attach a copy of the prior motions and orders in support of its ruling as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(h)(2). The State concedes this was error. We reverse and remand for attachment of the prior Rule 3.850 motion and the resulting order as it relates to Davis’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel in his violation-of-probation cases. We affirm as to the claims related to the original proceedings and alleging trial court error.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

SAWAYA, COHEN and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

1

. Davis’s initial brief is really no more than yet another Rule 3.850 motion alleging the *685 same forty-one grounds for relief. Twenty-four of these claims untimely challenged the trial court’s 2009 and 2011 judgments.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 So. 3d 684, 2016 WL 3125684, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 8460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-l-davis-jr-v-state-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack