Adlington v. State
This text of 599 So. 2d 1047 (Adlington v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We affirm the trial court order denying appellant’s motion to correct an illegal sentence. The motion was filed under both rule 3.800(a) and rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. However, we note that the motion was not properly filed under rule 3.850, as the oath provided only that the information was true to the best of the affiant’s knowledge. See Scott v. State, 464 So.2d 1171 (Fla.1985). Therefore, in this appeal we have not considered those issues cognizable under a properly sworn 3.850 motion since the trial court could have denied relief on the improper jurat ground alone.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
599 So. 2d 1047, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6465, 1992 WL 115790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adlington-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.