Dependency Law Finder

Florida's dependency statutes, court rules and DCF operating procedures, with the appellate opinions that apply them

data.robertlathamesq.org · All tools

Before you use this site

This site aggregates legal authorities from a variety of public sources. It is AI and human reviewed. Text processing errors can occur. Always check the information here against the official linked source.

This site is publicly available. Use for general research only. Do not submit confidential or identifiable case information.

I don't agree: show the official sources

Smith v. State641 So. 2d 188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994) · DCA94-02222

Court
District Court of Appeal
Decided
1994-08-19
Law cited
§ 39.059
On CourtListener
PER CURIAM.

Arthur Smith appeals from an order denying his 3.850 motion. He alleges that the trial court erred in imposing adult sanctions upon him without making written findings as to his suitability to be sentenced as an adult according to section 39.059, Florida Statutes (1992); that the court should have held a predispositional hearing and considered whether he should be treated as a youthful offender; and that his counsel was ineffective.

The trial judge summarily denied the motion without setting forth his reasons for denying the motion or attaching any record support for the denial.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order. On remand, if the court again denies relief, it must set forth reasons for the denial and attach portions of its records to refute appellant’s allegations. If the appellant is aggrieved by any subsequent action of the trial court, he must file a timely notice of appeal to obtain further appellate review.

Reversed and remanded.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and FULMER, JJ., concur.

Opinion text: CourtListener, Free Law Project. Not an official reporter; check the court's version before citing.