Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CHRISTOPHER YOUNG, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order summarily denying Appellant's post-conviction motion. His unnotarized oath was insufficient because the language he used would not subject him to perjury charges if his factual allegations prove to be false. Affirmance is without prejudice to Appellant to file a new motion that includes one of the oaths found in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.987. The new motion must be filed within the time remaining under 3.850(b).

The order on appeal simply stated that the motion was denied. The trial court did not order a response from the state, attach record excerpts to refute Appellant's factual allegations, or explain the reason for denial. If the court denies Appellant's new motion, the order should show the reason.

STONE, POLEN, and FARMER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

YOUNG v. STATE
(May 30, 2001)