Ramos v. State
979 So. 2d 359, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 5257, 2008 WL 977354
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ramos v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 931 So. 2d 1023 →
Opinion
GRIFFIN, J.
We are bound to reverse and remand the appealed order summarily denying claims three and five of Appellant’s Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion pursuant to the high court’s recent decision in Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754 (Fla.2007). Under Spera, Appellant is entitled to an opportunity to replead these two claims, which the [360]*360trial court correctly found to be devoid of facts, conclusory and legally insufficient.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
SAWAYA and COHEN, JJ„ concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ramos v. State, 979 So. 2d 359, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 5257, 2008 WL 977354 (Fla. Ct. App. 2008).
979 So. 2d 359 (Ramos v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Spera v. State
971 So. 2d 754 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2007)