Moncer v. State
This text of 697 So. 2d 1288 (Moncer 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.
Opinion
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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
697 So. 2d 1288, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9298, 1997 WL 464693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moncer-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.