Adcock v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Adcock v. State

861 So. 2d 1213, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18725, 2003 WL 22900439

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 10, 2003·No. No. 2D03-2997·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Gordon W. Adcock challenges the order of the trial court summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court denied the motion on the ground that it was facially insufficient. Our affirmance of the trial court’s order is without prejudice to any right Adcock might have to file a facially sufficient motion raising the same claim within sixty days from the issuance of the mandate in this case.

Affirmed.

WHATLEY, SALCINES, and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Gordon W. Adcock challenges the order of the trial court summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court denied the motion on the ground that it was facially insufficient. Our affirmance of the trial court’s order is without prejudice to any right Adcock might have to file a facially sufficient motion raising the same claim within sixty days from the issuance of the mandate in this case.

Affirmed.

WHATLEY, SALCINES, and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.

Adcock v. State, 861 So. 2d 1213, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18725, 2003 WL 22900439 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

861 So. 2d 1213 (Adcock v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.