Steinhorst v. State, 69659
| Decision Date | 26 November 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 69659,69659 |
| Citation | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 622,498 So.2d 414 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 622 Walter Gale STEINHORST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Larry Helm Spalding, Capital Collateral Representative and Mark Evan Olive, Litigation Coordinator, Office of the Capital Collateral Representative, Tallahassee, and Stephen D. Alexander of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, New York City, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Kurt L. Barch, Gregory G. Costas and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
This is an appeal from the summary denial by the circuit court of appellant's motion to vacate, set aside or correct judgments and sentences, filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Appellant argues that the circuit court erred in denying the motion without examination of the record of appellant's trial. A state prisoner under sentence of death, appellant seeks a stay of his scheduled execution.
Where a motion for post-conviction relief under rule 3.850 lacks any substantial factual allegations, or where the facts alleged, even if true, would not render the judgment vulnerable to collateral attack, the motion may be summarily denied without examination of the record. But where the motion contains allegations of substantial material facts stating a claim cognizable in post-conviction proceedings, the motion must be evaluated in light of the trial record. Steinhorst's allegations were sufficiently adequate to at least require an examination of the record.
It appears in this case that the circuit court judge did not examine the trial record and did not have the record before him when ruling on appellant's rule 3.850 motion.
Rule 3.850 provides in pertinent part as follows:
If the motion and the files and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the motion shall be denied without a hearing. In those instances when such denial is not predicated upon the legal insufficiency of the motion on its face, a copy of that portion of the files and records which conclusively shows that the prisoner is entitled to no relief shall be attached to the order. Unless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall order the State Attorney to file an answer or other pleading within the period of time fixed by the court or to take such other action as the judge deems...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. State, SC03-1229.
...to collateral attack, the motion may be summarily denied." Ragsdale v. State, 720 So.2d 203, 207 (Fla.1998) (citing Steinhorst v. State, 498 So.2d 414 (Fla.1986)). However, in cases where there has been no evidentiary hearing, this Court must accept "the defendant's factual allegations to t......
-
Robinson v. Crosby, No. SC04-772 (FL 7/7/2005)
...to collateral attack, the motion may be summarily denied." Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203, 207 (Fla. 1998) (citing Steinhorst v. State, 498 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 1986)). However, in cases where there has been no evidentiary hearing, this Court must accept "the defendant's factual allegations ......
-
Steinhorst v. State, 86109
...hold a new evidentiary proceeding pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and this Court's opinion in Steinhorst v. State, 498 So.2d 414, 414-15 (Fla.1986). In its prior decision remanding for a specific factual determination, the majority recognized that this case raised grave......
-
Nordelo v. State
...attack.” Arbelaez v. State, 775 So.2d 909, 915 (Fla.2000) (citing Ragsdale v. State, 720 So.2d 203 (Fla.1998)). In Steinhorst v. State, 498 So.2d 414 (Fla.1986), we explained the process as follows: Where a motion for post-conviction relief under rule 3.850 lacks any substantial factual all......