AUSTIN v. STATE (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Crystal Ann AUSTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-670

Decided: December 06, 2019

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Andrew Mich, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

Crystal Austin appeals the summary denial of her motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm as to Grounds Seven and Eight, but reverse as to Grounds One and Five because Austin should have been granted the opportunity to amend her motion to state a facially sufficient claim. See Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007) (“Accordingly, when 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.”).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

PER CURIAM.

EVANDER, C.J., ORFINGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network