Hills v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hills v. State

5 So. 3d 766, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2197, 2009 WL 676256

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 17, 2009

Docket1D08-5012

StatusPublished

This text of 5 So. 3d 766 (Hills 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

Hills v. State, 5 So. 3d 766, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2197, 2009 WL 676256 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant appeals an order summarily denying a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. On appeal from a summary denial of a facially-sufficient motion, this Court must reverse unless the postconviction record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief. See Fla. RApp. P. 9.141(b)(2).

Because the record now before us fails to make the required showing, we reverse the order and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court again enters an order summarily denying the postconviction motion, the court shall attach record excerpts conclusively showing that the appellant is entitled to no relief.

REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings.

BENTON and BROWNING, JJ., concur; WOLF, J., dissents without opinion.

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