LAURITO v. State

83 So. 3d 980, 2012 WL 966568, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4590
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 23, 2012·No. 5D11-644·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Although the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on Appellant’s rule 3.850 motion, it failed to make findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by rule 3.850(d). Accordingly, we reverse and remand this cause with instructions that the trial court make the required findings. Dillbeck v. State, 882 So.2d 969 (Fla.2004).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

MONACO, TORPY and COHEN, JJ., concur.

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

LAURITO v. State, 83 So. 3d 980, 2012 WL 966568, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4590 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

83 So. 3d 980 (LAURITO v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dillbeck v. State
882 So. 2d 969 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2004)