ELDRIDGE A. MCCRAY, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Oehling v. State, 659 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
  …th DCA 1991). We have held in the past that the state cannot cure the trial court’s oversight by designating portions of the record to refute a defendant’s allegations. Smothers v. State, 555 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). See also McCray v. State, 633 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part, and REMANDED. PETERSON, C.J., and HARRIS, J., concur. . See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(d). . See State v.…
• Sheffield v. State, 903 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
  …im presented in the motion.” Anderson, 627 So. 2d at 1171. We also reiterate the prior authority of this court that holds that the state cannot supplement a summary denial on appeal in order to prevent the reversal of the order. See McCray v. State, 633 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Prescott v. State, 698 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Even if it could supplement the record, the documents provided with the state’s motion for rehearing do not address the lengths of the various portions of Sheffield’s instan…
• Sheehan v. State, 759 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
  …ate, 622 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Thomas v. State, 634 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Although attachments to the state’s response indicate the trial court ruled correctly in this case, that is not sufficient under the rule. McCray v. State, 633 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Griffin v. State, 573 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings, including, allowing the trial court the opportunity to attach documentation to its order showing Shee-han has no…

Authorities Cited

• McGRADY v. State, 591 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
• Kendall v. State, 619 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)