TARDRICK HOLIDAY
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
When a defendant files a motion under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 3.800(a), the burden is on the movant to demonstrate that the trial court's error and the defendant's entitlement to relief are apparent from the face of the record.
[1] Under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 3.800(a), which permits motions for correction of sentencing errors without time limitation and without availability of evidenti…
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“Given the absence of any time limitation for filing a [rule 3.800(a)] motion, and the unavailability of an evidentiary hearing, the burden is on the movant to demonstrate that the trial court's error and the defendant's entitlement to relief are apparent from the face of the record.”
Court explaining the procedural differences between Rule 3.850 and Rule 3.800(a) motions and the applicable burden of proof.
Tardrick Holiday appealed from a circuit court decision in Miami-Dade County, filing an appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2).…
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 Florida Rule Of Appellate Procedure 9.141(B)(2) cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed January 3, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1851 Lower Tribunal No. F97-27421
________________
Tardrick Holiday,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michelle Delancy, Judge. Tardrick Holiday, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before LOGUE, C.J., and EMAS and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Cox v. State, 221 So. 3d 723, 725 n. 5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (comparing the procedural differences between a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.850 and one filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a), and noting: “Given the absence of any time limitation for filing a [rule 3.800(a)] motion, and the unavailability of an evidentiary hearing, the burden is on the movant to demonstrate that the trial court's error and the defendant's entitlement to relief are apparent from the face of the record.”) (emphasis added) (citing Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007); Porkolab v. State, 187 So. 3d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); McClain v. State, 157 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); Casteel v. State, 141 So. 3d 624 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); Smart v. State, 124 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013); Jarrett v. State, 89 So. 3d 293 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007)
- Scottie Smart, Jr. v. State, 124 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
- Casteel v. State, 141 So. 3d 624 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Emmett Timothy COX v. State, 221 So. 3d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)
- Jarrett v. State, 89 So. 3d 293 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)
- McCLAIN v. State, 157 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
- Porkolab v. State, 187 So. 3d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)