From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beatty v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Nov 29, 1994
647 So. 2d 261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Summary

affirming denial of rule 3.850 motion on grounds that it was "facially deficient in that it [did] not contain all of the information required by rule 3.850(c)"

Summary of this case from Burchfield v. State

Opinion

No. 94-1277.

November 29, 1994.

An appeal from Circuit Court for Duval County; Alban E. Brooke, Judge.

John Beatty, pro se.

No appearance by appellee.


The appellant's Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief is facially deficient, in that it does not contain all of the information required by rule 3.850(c). See, e.g., Schofield v. State, 641 So.2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). The order denying relief is therefore affirmed.

ALLEN, LAWRENCE and BENTON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Beatty v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Nov 29, 1994
647 So. 2d 261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

affirming denial of rule 3.850 motion on grounds that it was "facially deficient in that it [did] not contain all of the information required by rule 3.850(c)"

Summary of this case from Burchfield v. State
Case details for

Beatty v. State

Case Details

Full title:JOHN BEATTY, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Nov 29, 1994

Citations

647 So. 2d 261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Citing Cases

Burchfield v. State

While the standard for determining the facial sufficiency of rule 3.850 motions is one of "substantial…