State v. Rodriguez
| Citation | 523 So.2d 1141,13 Fla. L. Weekly 273 |
| Decision Date | 21 April 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 70392,70392 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 273 STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Carlos RODRIGUEZ, Respondent. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Steven T. Scott, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for petitioner.
Michael S. Hacker, Miami, for respondent.
Pursuant to Article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution, we accepted jurisdiction of this cause to resolve a conflict between our decision in Scott v. State, 464 So.2d 1171 (Fla.1985), and that of the Third District Court of Appeal below in State v. Rodriguez, 505 So.2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
The facts are simple. Respondent was charged by information with burglary of a conveyance and theft. He filed, through his attorney, a pleading captioned "Sworn Motion to Dismiss," under Rule 3.190(c)(4), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Our focus here is not on the merits of the motion, but on the jurat, which the rule requires. It read:
BEFORE me, the undersigned authority personally appeared, CARLOS MANUEL RODRIGUEZ, who by me first duly sworn, deposes and says the facts contained in the foregoing Motion To Dismiss are true and correct to the best of his knowledge.
(Emphasis supplied.)
The trial judge granted the motion to dismiss. On appeal, the state argued that the jurat was insufficient because of the words "to the best of his knowledge." In affirming the dismissal, the Third District Court of Appeal reasoned that the jurat "clearly rested upon the defendant's own knowledge of the facts recited in the motion."
In Scott this Court considered a jurat on a motion for postconviction relief under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, which read:
Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Paul William Scott, who, being first duly sworn, says that he has personal knowledge of the allegations in the foregoing motion to vacate judgment and/or sentence and that the allegations and statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge.
464 So.2d at 1172. Pointing out that the words "to the best of his knowledge" had been added to the standard oath (see the form in rule 3.987, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure), the Court held the jurat to be procedurally defective. We said:
Using this qualifying language, a defendant could file a motion for post-conviction relief based upon a false allegation of fact without fear of conviction for perjury. If the allegation proved to be false, the defendant would be able to simply respond that his verification of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Velazquez v. State, 89-96
...to dismiss. Reversed and remanded. 1 The jurat in the defendant's sworn motion to dismiss was technically defective, see State v. Rodriguez, 523 So.2d 1141 (Fla.1988), but this deficiency was cured by the defendant's oath given in open court. We reject the state's argument that this might b......
-
Johnson v. State
...the jurisdiction of the magistrate to whom the complaint is presented. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.120. Johnson principally relies on State v. Rodriguez, 523 So.2d 1141 (Fla.1988), and Scott v. State, 464 So.2d 1171 (Fla.1985), for the proposition that an affidavit including a reservation "to the best ......
-
State v. Purvis
...after the commencement of the hearing is untimely. State v. Rodriguez, 505 So.2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), reversed on other grounds, 523 So.2d 1141 (Fla.1988). In defense of its late filing, the State alleges that the hearing on the motions was scheduled for December 16, 1988, but that the C......
-
State v. Williams
...supporting the motion to dismiss are not sworn to, the motion is legally insufficient, and it should be summarily denied. State v. Rodriguez, 523 So.2d 1141 (Fla.1988). Because the legal sufficiency of the motion to dismiss was not raised below or on appeal, we have not decided this appeal ......