Rosario v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rosario v. State

903 So. 2d 1015, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8792, 2005 WL 1364564

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 10, 2005

DocketNo. 2D04-4561

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 903 So. 2d 1015 (Rosario 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

Rosario v. State, 903 So. 2d 1015, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8792, 2005 WL 1364564 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

CANADY, Judge.

Jorge Rosario appeals the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm Rosario’s second claim without comment. Because Rosario’s first claim is not conclusively refuted by the record attached to the trial court’s denial order, we reverse the denial of that claim. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(d).

Rosario contends that his no contest plea was involuntary because the trial court failed to conduct a plea colloquy that met the requirements of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(c). He claims that he was therefore unaware of his rights and that he would not have entered the plea if he had been advised of his rights. In denying this claim, the trial court attached a copy of the transcript of the proceeding at which the sentence was imposed on Rosario. The transcript does not reflect that a plea was entered at the hearing. The trial court erroneously concluded that Rosario’s claim was conclusively refuted by the transcript of the sentencing hearing.

We reverse the trial court’s denial of claim one. On remand, the trial court shall either attach those portions of the record conclusively refuting Rosario’s first claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

FULMER and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

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

CANADY, Judge.

Jorge Rosario appeals the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm Rosario’s second claim without comment. Because Rosario’s first claim is not conclusively refuted by the record attached to the trial court’s denial order, we reverse the denial of that claim. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(d).

Rosario contends that his no contest plea was involuntary because the trial court failed to conduct a plea colloquy that met the requirements of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(c). He claims that he was therefore unaware of his rights and that he would not have entered the plea if he had been advised of his rights. In denying this claim, the trial court attached a copy of the transcript of the proceeding at which the sentence was imposed on Rosario. The transcript does not reflect that a plea was entered at the hearing. The trial court erroneously concluded that Rosario’s claim was conclusively refuted by the transcript of the sentencing hearing.

We reverse the trial court’s denial of claim one. On remand, the trial court shall either attach those portions of the record conclusively refuting Rosario’s first claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

FULMER and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

903 So. 2d 1015, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8792, 2005 WL 1364564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosario-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack