SKYLER JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Skyler Jones appeals the trial court's denial of his postconviction relief motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The appellate court affirmed the denial of most claims but reversed and remanded as to two claims regarding ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to protect speedy trial rights and for alleged conflict of interest, finding procedural defects in the trial court's summary denials.
The trial court erred in summarily denying claims six and eight. As to claim six, the trial court failed to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting the claim. As to claim eight, the trial court improperly relied on documents from an unrelated civil case that were not made part of the criminal record and did not follow proper judicial notice procedures.
[1] A trial court must attach portions of the record that conclusively refute a legally sufficient postconviction claim or hold an evidentiary hearing.
[2] A trial court errs in summarily denying a postconviction claim by relying on court records not made part of the case record without proper judicial notice procedures.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“a trial court must attach to its order portions of the record that conclusively refute a legally sufficient postconviction claim or hold an evidentiary hearing”
Establishes the standard for proper summary denial of postconviction claims and the basis for reversing the summary denial of claim six.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSkyler Jones filed a postconviction relief motion asserting eight claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court summarily denied six cl…
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 Discharge cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Skyler Jones, appeals the denial of his postconviction relief motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court summarily denied relief as to six claims and denied relief as to the two remaining claims following an evidentiary hearing. We find no error in the trial court’s denial of relief as to claims one through five and seven. However, we reverse as to the summary denial of claims six and eight and remand.
As the State conceded in its response to our show cause order, the trial court failed to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting Appellant’s sixth claim that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to protect his right to a speedy trial and in failing to file a motion for discharge. See Washington v. State, 10 So.3d 1126, 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (noting that a trial court must attach to its order portions of the record that conclusively refute a legally sufficient postconviction claim or hold an evidentiary hearing).
With respect to claim eight wherein Appellant alleged that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because trial counsel had a conflict of interest, the trial court, in summarily denying relief, relied upon court records for one of the State’s witnesses. There is no indication, however, that these documents were made part of the record in this case or that the trial court utilized the proper procedure in taking judicial notice of the documents. See Ward v. State, 984 So.2d 650, 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (holding that the trial court, in summarily denying a postconviction claim, erred in relying on the record in a civil case that the defendant had been a party to because the documents at issue were never properly made part of the record in the criminal case and noting that although a trial court may take judicial notice of its own records after affording the parties a reasonable opportunity to present information relevant to the propriety of taking judicial notice and to the nature of the matter noticed, the trial court did not follow that procedure); see also Smalls v. State, 18 So.3d 606, 608 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (concluding that the trial court erred in relying upon photographs that were not part of the record in summarily denying relief as to a postconviction claim).
Accordingly, the order is AFFIRMED as to claims one through five and seven,
*75REVERSED as to claims six and eight, and the case REMANDED for further proceedings.
DAVIS, CLARK, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dukes v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)…See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(5) (providing for summary denial of a postconviction claim only where it “can be conclusively resolved either as a matter of law or by reliance upon the records in the case” (emphasis added); see also Jones v. State, 35 So. 3d 73, 74 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (“[T]he trial court, in summarily denying relief, relied upon court records for one of the State’s witnesses. There is no indication, however, that these documents were made part of the record in this case or that the trial c…
Authorities Cited
- Kirkland Washington v. State, 10 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Smalls v. State, 18 So. 3d 606 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Ward v. State, 984 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)