From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ellis v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Dec 14, 2001
800 So. 2d 761 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Opinion

Case No. 5D01-3098

Opinion filed December 14, 2001

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lake County. T. Michael Johnson, Judge.

Mark Orben Ellis, Lowell, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee and Mary G. Jolley, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.


Mark Orben Ellis appeals the denial of his rule 3.850 motion. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850. Concluding that the trial court erred in denying the motion solely on the basis that it was not notarized, we reverse.

In order for a rule 3.850 motion to be legally sufficient it does not have to be notarized, it only has to contain a signed declaration. See State v. Shearer, 628 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 1993) (holding that a defendant's post-conviction motion must contain either a notarized oath or a signed declaration). Since Ellis' motion contained a signed declaration, it was legally sufficient. The State candidly admits that the motion was sufficient and this matter should be remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COBB and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ellis v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Dec 14, 2001
800 So. 2d 761 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
Case details for

Ellis v. State

Case Details

Full title:MARK O. ELLIS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Dec 14, 2001

Citations

800 So. 2d 761 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

Crockett v. State

Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to attach portions of the record which demonstrate that…