McFarlane v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McFarlane v. State

155 So. 3d 444, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 131, 2015 WL 73984

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 7, 2015

Docket3D14-2701

StatusPublished

This text of 155 So. 3d 444 (McFarlane 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

McFarlane v. State, 155 So. 3d 444, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 131, 2015 WL 73984 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a February 6, 2014 order (and a September 22, 2014 order on rehearing) summarily denying Milton McFarlane’s motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) to correct an illegal sentence (the “Order”). The Order denies the appellant’s rule 3.800 motion as successive and refers to two earlier motions filed by McFarlane to correct his sentence. While those earlier motions, and the orders denying them, might be in the “court file” as referenced in the Order, they are not attached to the Order and are not a part of the record on appeal.

When, as here, the trial court summarily denies a rule 3.800 motion, the record must show conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief; otherwise this Court must remand. Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D).

If the trial court relies on a portion of the court file not contained in the postcon-viction record, it is incumbent upon the .trial court to make those portions of the court file part of the record. See Boyd v. State, 57 So.3d 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).

If the trial court again enters an order summarily denying the postconviction motion, the trial court shall attach record excerpts conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to any relief.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a February 6, 2014 order (and a September 22, 2014 order on rehearing) summarily denying Milton McFarlane’s motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) to correct an illegal sentence (the “Order”). The Order denies the appellant’s rule 3.800 motion as successive and refers to two earlier motions filed by McFarlane to correct his sentence. While those earlier motions, and the orders denying them, might be in the “court file” as referenced in the Order, they are not attached to the Order and are not a part of the record on appeal.

When, as here, the trial court summarily denies a rule 3.800 motion, the record must show conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief; otherwise this Court must remand. Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D).

If the trial court relies on a portion of the court file not contained in the postcon-viction record, it is incumbent upon the .trial court to make those portions of the court file part of the record. See Boyd v. State, 57 So.3d 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).

If the trial court again enters an order summarily denying the postconviction motion, the trial court shall attach record excerpts conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to any relief.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 So. 3d 444, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 131, 2015 WL 73984, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcfarlane-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack