3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County.Samuel Bookhardt, III, Judge.
Kevin Fulmore, Sr., Jasper, pro se.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D.Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, forAppellee.
August 28, 2025
PER CURIAM.
Appellant moved for postconviction relief under Florida Ruleof Criminal Procedure 3.850, arguing that his counsel wasineffective in several ways during his violation of probation case.The postconviction court summarily denied the motion. We affirmin all respects except one.
Original opinion page 2
2The trial court revoked Appellant’s probation based in part ona finding that he committed felony battery. In his Rule 3.850motion, Appellant alleged that his GPS monitor would have shownthat he was not present when the battery occurred. He claimedthat counsel was ineffective for not presenting this allegedinformation at his VOP hearing.The postconviction court denied this claim as speculative, butAppellant’s motion alleged that his GPS monitor would haveexonerated him of the felony battery. See Robledo v. State, 359 So.3d 850, 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“Robledo, however, did not assertthat the GSR test result might have been negative—he definitivelyasserted that it would have been negative. Therefore, the claimwas not speculative.”). And without an evidentiary hearing, thecourt had to accept this allegation as true unless it was refuted bythe record. SeeHarrell v. State, 338 So. 3d 415, 418 (Fla. 5th DCA2022). Therefore, we reverse the summary denial of the GPS claimand remand for the court to either attach additional records thatrefute the claim or hold an evidentiary hearing. See id. at 424; seealso Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(8)(B) (stating that in an evidentiaryhearing, the defendant has the burden of presenting evidence andthe burden of proof in support of his motion).AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED withinstructions.JAY, C.J., and WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ., concur._____________________________Not final until disposition of any timely andauthorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or9.331._____________________________
Opinion text and original PDF from Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal · Source opinion