ELWOOD LAMAR ALBRIGHT, 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.
Elwood Albright appealed the denial of his motion to vacate a sentence for breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, claiming denial of the right to counsel. The trial court reviewed the reporter's notes and found that Albright was adequately represented and denied relief; the appellate court affirmed this decision.
The trial court properly denied the motion to vacate, having found through review of the record that Albright was in fact represented by counsel at sentencing and all other stages of the proceeding. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding and disposition.
“the Court finds that the Defendant was in truth and in fact represented by L. Clayton Nance at the time of said sentencing, as reflected by the Court Reporter's notes and was represented at all other stages before this Court as reflected by the Minutes of the Court”
Establishes the trial court's factual finding that Albright had adequate representation, directly refuting his claim of denial of counsel.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAlbright was convicted of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony and received a sentence. He filed a motion to vacate and set aside the …
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 Prima Facie Case For Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal .occurs upon denial of appellant’s motion to vacate and set aside a sentence imposed after conviction of Breaking and Entering with Intent to Commit a Felony. Appellant’s motion was based' upon an alleged denial of the right to counsel and contained factual allegations as to the circumstances surrounding his conviction and sentencing which sufficed to state a prima facie case for relief. See King v. State, Fla.App.1963, 157 So.2d 440.
Upon receipt of the motion, the able trial judge caused the court reporter’s notes of the hearing at which conviction and sentencing occurred to be transcribed and, after considering these and the remaining “files and records in the cause,” entered a comprehensive order detailing, with appropriate references, all of the circumstances disclosed by the record. Copies of all record entries and the transcription of the-*896reporter’s notes were attached to the order. This order concludes:
“ * * * [T]he Court finds that the Defendant was in truth and in fact represented by L. Clayton Nance at the time of said sentencing, as reflected by the Court Reporter’s notes and was represented at all other stages before this Court as reflected by the Minutes of the Court, and upon consideration thereof, it is the finding of the Court that the files and records herein conclusively show that the Prisoner is entitled to no relief, and it is, therefore
“ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant’s said Petition be, and the same is hereby denied.”
We find no error in this finding or the disposition of cause and, with appropriate recognition of the commendable procedure employed in the trial court, affirmed.
Affirmed.
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and SHANNON and WHITE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crusoe v. State, 183 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…e a part of the record here. So all references in defendant’s motion to his “history of incompetency” and the trial Judge’s lack of knowledge thereof must yield to the affirmative showing of the certified record. See Albright v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 895; Abbott v. State, Fla.App.1964, 164 So. 2d 243; Dykes v. State, supra; Murray v. State, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 313; Hale v. State, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 5; Everett v. State, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 714. [*605] Furthermore, the record discloses…
-
Breamfield v. State, 166 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…he position of the State and grant the motion to quash. It is patent and conclusive from the trial record that the petitioner was entitled to no relief, and the trial judge was under a duty to deny the petition. See: Albright v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 895. Since the rendition of the decision in Gideon v. Wainwright, supra, by the Supreme Court of the United States, the trial courts and appellate courts of this State have endeavored [commencing with the promulgation of Criminal Procedure Rule 1] thro…
Authorities Cited
- King v. State, 157 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)