OLADEJO IYIOLA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of defendant's supplemental motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 because the affidavit lacked the defendant's signature and failed to attest that the motion's facts were true and correct.
An affidavit supporting a motion for collateral relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 must be signed by the defendant and must attest that the facts in the motion are true and correct.
[1] An affidavit supporting a motion for collateral relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 must be signed by the defendant and must attest that the facts alleg…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant Oladejo Iyiola filed a supplemental motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, accompanied by an affidavit that was n…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Relief Pursuant To Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The affidavit made a part of the defendant’s supplemental motion for relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 reads:
AFFIDAVIT
I, Oladejo Iyiola being first duly sworn, depose and say I am the defendant, in the above-entitled case; that in support of my presence and ability to recollect the incidents with accuracy. I solemnly declare that the above stated allegations and occurrences are correct and true without any slightest doubt as per my exhibiting keen perception at the time of incident.
That I believe I am entitled to redress, fact-finding; and that the issues that I desire to present on appeal are as given above in the action entered on the 2nd day of October, 1986. SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED to before me on this 30th day of November 1987
/s/ Illegible NOTARY PUBLIC
The trial court correctly denied the supplemental motion because the affidavit was insufficient. In the first place, the defendant did not affix his signature to the affidavit. Secondly, the affidavit did not attest that the facts contained in the motion, as supplemented, were true and correct. The purpose of the oath adopted by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.987 is to discourage the practice of filing perjured and unfounded motions. State v. Rodriguez, 523 So. 2d 1141 (Fla.1988); Scott v. State, 464 So. 2d 1171 (Fla.1985).
The order dismissing the motion is denied without prejudice to the defendant’s right to timely file a properly sworn motion for collateral relief.
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mercedoine Allen v. State, 644 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…t’s motion for postconviction relief without prejudice to defendant to refile a properly sworn motion pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. See Scott v. State, 464 So. 2d 1171 (Fla.1985); Ross v. State, 598 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Iyiola v. State, 530 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Scott v. State, 464 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 1985)
- State v. Rodriguez, 523 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 1988)