context: . Appellant, Coty Williams, appeals the summaiy denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief, which alleged multiple grounds for relief. We find that Williams is entitled to an opportunity to amend 'His third and fifth grounds for relief.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 971 So.2d 754, 761
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that a defendant who files a legally insufficient rule 3.850 motion for failing to meet pleading requirements should be allowed at least one opportunity to amend
citation_a.sentence: See Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007) (holding that a defendant who files a legally insufficient rule 3.850 motion for failing to meet pleading requirements should be allowed at least one opportunity to amend); see also Ferris v. State, 996 So.2d 228, 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (requiring an opportunity to amend because “the trial court did not deny, the claim on the basis of facial insufficiency, and, as such, the appellant could not have been aware of the application of Spera to this issue”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 996 So.2d 228, 229
citation_b.parenthetical: requiring an opportunity to amend because "the trial court did not deny, the claim on the basis of facial insufficiency, and, as such, the appellant could not have been aware of the application of Spera to this issue"
citation_b.sentence: See Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007) (holding that a defendant who files a legally insufficient rule 3.850 motion for failing to meet pleading requirements should be allowed at least one opportunity to amend); see also Ferris v. State, 996 So.2d 228, 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (requiring an opportunity to amend because “the trial court did not deny, the claim on the basis of facial insufficiency, and, as such, the appellant could not have been aware of the application of Spera to this issue”).