Pryor v. State, 93-1018

• Decision Date: 15 October 1993
• Docket Number: No. 93-1018,93-1018
• Citation: 625 So.2d 917
• Parties: 18 Fla. L. Weekly D2257 Charlie Bennett PRYOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 917

625 So.2d 917

18 Fla. L. Weekly D2257

Charlie Bennett PRYOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 93-1018.

District Court of Appeal of Florida,

First District.

Oct. 15, 1993.

Charlie Bennett Pryor, pro se, appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Pryor appeals the trial court's order denying his motion for post-conviction relief. The court's denial was based on its finding that the motion was a successive one which failed to allege any new or different grounds for relief, and which, in addition, had received a prior ruling on its merits; however, the court failed to attach any portion of the record substantiating its ruling. As was observed in Bell v. State, 585 So.2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991):

[Rule 3.850] does not expressly provide for such attachments when the trial court dismisses a motion after finding that it is successive. Without the attachment of any prior motions filed by the prisoner and other pertinent records in the case, however, this court is precluded from adequately reviewing the order of dismissal.

Id. Due to the serious nature of Pryor's allegations, as well as his apparent confusion regarding the ramifications of the first order of dismissal (which, incidentally, did not inform Pryor of his right to appeal), we reverse and remand the cause for the attachment of any documents in the record that would support the court's dismissal, or for further proceedings consistent with the rule.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

ZEHMER, C.J., and WEBSTER, J., concur.

BARFIELD, J., dissents with written opinion.

BARFIELD, Judge, dissenting.

Were it not for the insufficiency of the motion filed with the trial court to state a basis for relief, I would be inclined to agree with my colleagues and reverse as the majority has done. However, the record before this court contains the motion and arguments in their entirety as filed with the trial court. It is my belief that those pleadings, on their face, will fail to afford relief to appellant. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent and would affirm.