Tyson v. State, 2D02-5462.
| Decision Date | 22 August 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D02-5462.,2D02-5462. |
| Parties | Clellan TYSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Clellan Tyson appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm because Tyson's motion was facially insufficient.
In his motion, Tyson alleged that his sentencing guidelines scoresheet included seven prior convictions which had been "either dismissed or dropped" and that a corrected scoresheet would dictate a lower sentence. The State responded to the motion and submitted, as exhibits to its response, copies of judgments and sentences entered in some of the challenged cases to support the points scored for prior record. The exhibits were not a part of the trial court record in the proceeding in which the challenged sentence was imposed. The trial court relied upon the exhibits submitted by the State as the basis for denying Tyson's motion on its merits. The merit of a rule 3.800(a) motion to correct a sentence can, however, be determined only by reference to the record of the proceedings in which the challenged sentence was imposed. It was thus inappropriate for the trial court to consider the extraneous records submitted by the State.
The trial court's denial of Tyson's motion was nonetheless correct-albeit not for the reasons articulated by the trial court. Tyson's motion was facially insufficient because it did not "affirmatively allege[] that the court records [in the instant proceeding] demonstrate on their face an entitlement to th[e] relief" sought. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a). The trial court should have denied the motion on the basis of that facial insufficiency.
Ordinarily, the type of error raised by Tyson will not be apparent on the face of the record and therefore will not be a basis for relief under rule 3.800(a). See Lomont v. State, 506 So.2d 1141, 1141-42 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (); cf. McCullough v. State, 777 So.2d 1091, 1091 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Purifoy v. State
...... be determined only by reference to the record of the proceedings in which the challenged sentence was imposed," Tyson v. State, 852 So.2d 428, 429 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), it was improper for the postconviction court to consider and rely on the However, Mr. Purifoy is not entitled to postcon......
-
Hoag v. State
...2d DCA Mar. 2, 2012); Hoag v. State, 12 So.3d 907 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Bizzell v. State, 912 So.2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Tyson v. State, 852 So.2d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Gonsalves v.. State, 830 So.2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Horton v. State, 696 So.2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).ALTENBERND, N......
-
McClain v. State
...the proceedings in which the challenged sentence was imposed demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief. See Tyson v. State, 852 So.2d 428, 429 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (holding that Rule 3.800(a) motion “was facially insufficient because it did not ‘affirmatively allege[ ] that the court......
-
Thrasher v. State
...in order to have determined whether Thrasher's out-of-state convictions were analogous to a Florida offense. See Tyson v. State, 852 So. 2d 428, 429 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (stating that merit of rule 3.800(a) motion can only be determined by reference to record of proceedings in which challenge......