390 So. 2d 447 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1980
The appellant filed a pro se motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 seeking relief from the judgment and sentence and addressing matters which can be raised in a collateral attack. He sought to have his convictions of aggravated battery and burglary vacated and to have a new trial because he alleged he was denied effective assistance of counsel. The appellant’s motion is legally sufficient and, if true, would entitle him to relief.
Where the motion is legally sufficient on its face, it is the duty of the trial court to comply with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 by holding an eviden-tiary hearing to determine if the relief should be granted. However, if the case file and record conclusively show petitioner is entitled to no relief, then the court should deny relief in an order specifically setting out the reasons for the denial, and it should
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.