Akins v. State

926 So. 2d 412, 2006 WL 572170
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 10, 2006
Docket2D05-763
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 926 So. 2d 412 (Akins 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.

Bluebook
Akins v. State, 926 So. 2d 412, 2006 WL 572170 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

926 So.2d 412 (2006)

Michael Eugene AKINS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2D05-763.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 10, 2006.
Rehearing Denied April 28, 2006.

Michael Eugene Akins, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Michael Akins violated his probation and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. *413 He timely filed a motion to reconsider his sentence, which the court denied. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(c). Akins challenges that denial in this appeal. Such an order is not appealable, however, and Akins has shown no basis for invoking our certiorari jurisdiction. See Tsikuris v. State, 913 So.2d 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Accordingly, we dismiss this proceeding.

We note that Akins has also raised a double jeopardy issue concerning a supposed amendment of his sentence. The circuit court originally sentenced him on November 19, 2004. In his brief, Akins claims that on April 29, 2005, the court entered an amended sentence designating him as a habitual offender, a provision not included in his original sentence. Akins's motion to mitigate and this appeal from the denial of that motion were filed before the amended sentence was rendered. Moreover, our record does not establish that he has challenged the amendment in the circuit court. As such, we have no jurisdiction to review the double jeopardy issue in this proceeding. We express no opinion about whether Akins may be entitled to relief on that point. See Ashley v. State, 850 So.2d 1265 (Fla.2003); Evans v. State, 675 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). But see Scanes v. State, 876 So.2d 1238 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 892 So.2d 1014 (Fla.2004). But this opinion is without prejudice to his right, if any, to raise this issue in a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).

Dismissed.

SALCINES, J., and DANAHY, PAUL W., Senior Judge, Concur.

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

Related

PHILIP WALLACE STAUDERMAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA
261 So. 3d 649 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)
State v. Akins
69 So. 3d 261 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2011)
Walters v. State
994 So. 2d 1230 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
926 So. 2d 412, 2006 WL 572170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akins-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.