Marti v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Marti v. State

867 So. 2d 438, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 921, 2004 WL 231218

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 4, 2004

DocketNo. 4D03-235

StatusPublished

This text of 867 So. 2d 438 (Marti 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

Marti v. State, 867 So. 2d 438, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 921, 2004 WL 231218 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Radi Marti appeals the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The motion advanced seven claims of error. We affirm, without discussion, the denial of claim two and claims four through seven. However, we reverse the trial court’s denial of claims one and three and remand for the attachment of record excerpts conclusively showing appellant is not entitled to relief on these claims. If no such record excerpts exist, appellant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing.

STONE, WARNER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Radi Marti appeals the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The motion advanced seven claims of error. We affirm, without discussion, the denial of claim two and claims four through seven. However, we reverse the trial court’s denial of claims one and three and remand for the attachment of record excerpts conclusively showing appellant is not entitled to relief on these claims. If no such record excerpts exist, appellant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing.

STONE, WARNER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

867 So. 2d 438, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 921, 2004 WL 231218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marti-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.