Stewart v. State

902 So. 2d 879, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8010, 2005 WL 1249066
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Stewart v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 840 So. 2d 438
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 27, 2005·No. No. 1D04-4051·Published

Opinion

BROWNING, J.

Reversal is required in this appeal from the summary denial of Appellant’s postcon-viction motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, because [880]*880the trial court failed to attach portions of the record that refute Appellant’s claims. See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 840 So.2d 369 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Although the trial court found that any error was harmless, this Court will not presume harmlessness. See Banks v. State, 673 So.2d 937 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). On remand, the trial court is directed to attach the portions which refute the claims. In the alternative, the trial court may hold an evidentiary hearing on Appellant’s claims.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WOLF, C.J.; and DAVIS, J., concur.

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

Stewart v. State, 902 So. 2d 879, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8010, 2005 WL 1249066 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

902 So. 2d 879 (Stewart v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Johnson v. State
840 So. 2d 369 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Banks v. State
673 So. 2d 937 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)