WILLIAMS v. STATE (2019)

Darrell Williams appeals the postconviction court's summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 Motion for Postconviction Relief. Williams raised twelve grounds for relief in his motion. We affirm the summary denial of grounds one, two, and eleven without further discussion.

As to the remaining grounds, because the postconviction court did not attach any court records to its denial order, we reverse and remand for the court either to attach such records to its order that conclusively refute these claims or to conduct an evidentiary hearing.¹ See Hird v. State, 204 So. 3d 483, 484 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (“To uphold the summary denial [of a rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief], ‘the claims must be either facially invalid or conclusively refuted by the record.’ ” (quoting Peede v. State, 748 So. 2d 253, 257 (Fla. 1999))); see also Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(5) (“If the [summary] denial is based on the records in the case, a copy of that portion of the files and records that conclusively shows that the defendant is entitled to no relief shall be attached to the final order.”).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   We acknowledge that the order under review referenced portions of the record that were to be attached to the order showing that Williams was not entitled to any relief. However, no records were actually attached to the order.

PER CURIAM.

EVANDER, C.J., LAMBERT and SASSO, JJ., concur.