Hickox v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hickox v. State

691 So. 2d 539, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3159, 1997 WL 154770

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 4, 1997

DocketNo. 96-4180

StatusPublished

This text of 691 So. 2d 539 (Hickox 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

Hickox v. State, 691 So. 2d 539, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3159, 1997 WL 154770 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Hickox appeals the summary denial of an amended motion for post-conviction relief. Although the trial court’s order suggests that it found the claims raised in this amended motion to be identical to claims raised in other post-conviction motions filed both before and after the motion at issue here, which motions were denied by prior orders, the trial court failed to append to its order portions of the record (i.e., the prior orders and the motions giving rise to same) supporting its conclusion. Accordingly, we reverse the order summarily denying relief on the amended motion for post-conviction relief and remand to the trial court for attachment of portions of the record demonstrating that appellant is not entitled to relief, or for an evidentiary hearing, if warranted.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Hickox appeals the summary denial of an amended motion for post-conviction relief. Although the trial court’s order suggests that it found the claims raised in this amended motion to be identical to claims raised in other post-conviction motions filed both before and after the motion at issue here, which motions were denied by prior orders, the trial court failed to append to its order portions of the record (i.e., the prior orders and the motions giving rise to same) supporting its conclusion. Accordingly, we reverse the order summarily denying relief on the amended motion for post-conviction relief and remand to the trial court for attachment of portions of the record demonstrating that appellant is not entitled to relief, or for an evidentiary hearing, if warranted.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

691 So. 2d 539, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3159, 1997 WL 154770, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hickox-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.