NAMON D. PAIGE, 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.
The court held that the motion to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence was properly denied without an evidentiary hearing.
Appellant was convicted of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. He subsequently filed a motion to vacate the judgment and sentence, alleging groun…
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 Judgment And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Namon D. Paige, was convicted by jury for the crime of rape. The majority of the jury recommended mercy. Following the trial the judge sentenced appellant to life imprisonment. He filed notice of appeal and this court affirmed. Paige v. State, Fla.App.1969, 227 So.2d 727.
Subsequently, appellant filed a RCrP 3.-850, 33 F.S.A., motion in an effort to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence. After review and consideration the motion was denied by the Honorable Gun-ter Stephenson, circuit judge, Tenth Judicial Circuit. The present appeal seeks a reversal of the court’s order entered thereon.
We have re-examined the entire record and files in the case of Paige v. State, supra, and have carefully read appellant’s brief filed pro se in support of his contention that he is entitled to an eviden-tiary hearing as provided in Rule 3.850, supra.- The grounds alleged therein appear to be matters that were, or could have been, raised in appellant’s direct appeal to *193this court. Yanks v. State, Fla.App.1973, 273 So.2d 401. They are based solely on his mere conclusions, unsupported by allegations of fact and without more, are not sufficient to justify an evidentiary hearing. In addition, there is no showing that appellant’s trial resulted in a denial or violation of his constitutionally guaranteed rights. Swindle v. State, Fla.App.1967, 202 So.2d 132; cert. den. Fla.1968, 211 So.2d 215; Peterson v. State, Fla.App.1970, 237 So.2d 223.
In the light of the record presented here we are in agreement with the conclusion reached by the trial court judge that the contentions thus made as grounds for relief from the conviction were refuted in the record; and, we hold that the said motion to vacate and set aside was properly denied without evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, the order appealed is
Affirmed.
MANN, C. J., and LILES and BOARD-MAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Donnie Rogers v. State, 362 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…f the entry of the plea in 1974 clearly establishes the voluntariness of the plea absent any new facts to bring the voluntariness into question. The defendant having failed to allege any such fact, the order appealed is affirmed. See Paige v. State, 282 So. 2d 192 (Fla.2d DCA 1973); Whitlow v. State, 256 So. 2d 48 (Fla.2d DCA 1971); and Gibson v. State, 213 So. 2d 8 (Fla.4th DCA 1968). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Peterson v. State, 237 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Swindle v. State, 202 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
- Yanks v. State, 273 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Schofman v. Hawkins, 211 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 1968)
- Swindle v. State, 211 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 1968)
- Namon D. Paige v. State, 227 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)