In order to permit meaningful appellate review of whether a court properly exercised its discretion, a court must provide at least a brief statement of reasons with its order. The appellate court summarily denied Jorge Hernandez's motion to recall the mandate, providing no reasoning. Did the appellate court abuse its discretion by failing to provide any reasoning to permit meaningful appellate review?

Did the appellate court abuse its discretion by failing to provide any reasoning to permit meaningful appellate review?