Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Maximiliano Rey Valhuerdi, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee.
Appellant Maximiliano Rey Valhuerdi appeals the trial court's summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief timely filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court found the motion insufficient—without providing Valhuerdi the opportunity to amend. In doing so, it erred. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(2) (“If the motion is insufficient on its face, and the motion is timely filed under this rule, the court shall enter a nonfinal, nonappealable order allowing the defendant 60 days to amend the motion.”); Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007) (“[W]hen a defendant's initial rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief is determined to be legally insufficient for failure to meet either the rule's or other pleading requirements, the trial court abuses its discretion when it fails to allow the defendant at least one opportunity to amend the motion.”); Gonzalez v. State, 329 So. 3d 263, 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“A trial court abuses its discretion when it summarily denies a timely 3.850 motion, without permitting amendment.”); Charles v. State, 193 So. 3d 46, 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (“To the extent that a postconviction claim is conclusory or otherwise facially insufficient, the trial court should not deny the claim on its merits, but instead should enter a nonfinal order that provides the defendant the opportunity to amend the motion to state a legally sufficient claim for relief.”); Marckson v. State, 151 So. 3d 44, 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (“Although we agree with the trial court's determination that the motion was legally insufficient, we reverse and remand because, rather than entering a final order denying the motion on its merits, the trial court should have entered a non-final, non-appealable order dismissing the motion with leave to amend within sixty days.”).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to provide Valhuerdi with the opportunity to amend his motion to assert legally sufficient claims.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 3D24-2187
Decided: September 17, 2025
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)