From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Feb 28, 2001
787 So. 2d 62 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Opinion

No. 2D00-3652.

Opinion filed February 28, 2001.

Appeal pursuant to Fla.R.App.P.9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Wayne L. Cobb, Judge.


John Mark Anderson appeals the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reverse the trial court's order because the trial court failed to address the issues raised in Anderson's motion or to attach relevant portions of the record.

To support summary denial without a hearing, a trial court must either state its rationale in its decision or attach those specific parts of the record that refute each claim presented in the motion. See Anderson v. State, 627 So.2d 1170, 1171 (Fla. 1993); Hoffman v. State, 571 So.2d 449, 450 (Fla. 1990). The trial court's order failed to do either.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's order and remand for reconsideration. If the trial court again concludes that summary denial is proper, it must set forth its rationale and attach any relevant portions of the record that conclusively show relief is not required.

Reversed and Remanded.

BLUE, A.C.J., and WHATLEY and GREEN, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

Anderson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Feb 28, 2001
787 So. 2d 62 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
Case details for

Anderson v. State

Case Details

Full title:JOHN MARK ANDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Feb 28, 2001

Citations

787 So. 2d 62 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

McPherson v. State

Because McPherson presented a facially sufficient claim, we reverse the trial court's order as it applies to…

Foster v. State

The postconviction court did not attach any portions of the record to refute the claims concerning Mr.…