DINO MARCHETTI, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1996-03-20
No. 96-193
Per Curiam
669 So. 2d 1130 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1996)

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.

Synopsis

Defendant's motion for belated appeal is granted because the trial court failed to provide required notice of appeal rights and conducted an evidentiary hearing on post-conviction relief without the defendant or counsel present.


Holding

A defendant is entitled to a belated appeal and a new hearing on post-conviction relief when the trial court fails to provide notice of appeal rights and conducts an evidentiary hearing without the defendant or counsel present.


Headnotes

[1] A prisoner's presence at a hearing on a motion for post-conviction relief is within the trial court's discretion except when evidence is presented and the prisoner is not…

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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The trial court denied defendant Marchetti's motion for post-conviction relief on May 15, 1995, without providing notice of his right to appeal within…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Dino Marchetti’s motion for belated appeal is granted and the order under review reversed. The state concedes that the defendant is entitled to a belated appeal of the trial court’s order of May 15, 1995, which denied the defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief. The order did not give the defendant the required notice that he had a right to appeal that had to be exercised within thirty days. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(g); State ex rel. Shevin v. District Court of Appeal, Third District, 316 So. 2d 50 (Fla.1975); Nava v. State, 652 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).

Further, a prisoner’s presence at a hearing on a motion for post-conviction relief is within the discretion of the trial court “except when evidence is presented and the prisoner is not represented by counsel.” Clark v. State, 491 So. 2d 545 (Fla.1986).

Here, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief without the defendant or anyone representing him being present.

Thus, the defendant is entitled to a new hearing on his motion, in the presence of the defendant and/or his counsel.

Accordingly, the motion for belated appeal is granted. The order under review is reversed, and the cause remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw