Tanner v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tanner v. State

652 So. 2d 1295, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4387, 1995 WL 238626

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 26, 1995·No. No. 95-0327·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, William Tanner, seeks review of an order of the trial court which summarily denied his motion filed pursuant to Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850. The order denying the motion was filed without an evidentiary hearing but it incorporated by reference the state’s response to the motion which attached portions of the trial record. Because we do not find that the allegations of the motion were either legally insufficient or conclusively disproved by the portions of the record which were incorporated into the order, we reverse and remand. The trial court may either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attachment of those portions of the record which conclusively disprove the allegations of the motion.

STONE, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, William Tanner, seeks review of an order of the trial court which summarily denied his motion filed pursuant to Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850. The order denying the motion was filed without an evidentiary hearing but it incorporated by reference the state’s response to the motion which attached portions of the trial record. Because we do not find that the allegations of the motion were either legally insufficient or conclusively disproved by the portions of the record which were incorporated into the order, we reverse and remand. The trial court may either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attachment of those portions of the record which conclusively disprove the allegations of the motion.

STONE, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Tanner v. State, 652 So. 2d 1295, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4387, 1995 WL 238626 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

652 So. 2d 1295 (Tanner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.