Moncer v. State

697 So. 2d 1288, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9298, 1997 WL 464693
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Moncer v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12896
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 15, 1997·No. No. 97-01333·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Moncer appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconvietion relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Significant portions of the copy of appellant’s motion contained in the record on appeal are illegible. Although the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion was rendered only on February 18,1997, the clerk of circuit court has already destroyed the court file and committed it to microfilm; the clerk advises that no clearer copy of appellant’s motion is available.1

Under the circumstances, we are unable to review the propriety of the order denying the motion. Therefore, we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion for postconvietion relief, and remand with instructions that appellant be permitted to refile his motion within thirty days following the issuance of our mandate. Cf. Van Scoyoc v.York, 173 So.2d 483 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 179 So.2d 214 (Fla.1965) (appellate court has power to grant new trial where records essential to appellate review destroyed by official of lower court through no fault of appellant).

Reversed and remanded.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and FRANK and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.

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

Moncer v. State, 697 So. 2d 1288, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9298, 1997 WL 464693 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

697 So. 2d 1288 (Moncer v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Van Scoyoc v. York
173 So. 2d 483 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
Moncer v. State
666 So. 2d 558 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)