Alamo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Alamo v. State

738 So. 2d 1018, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10698, 1999 WL 599248

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 11, 1999

DocketNo. 99-01087

StatusPublished

This text of 738 So. 2d 1018 (Alamo 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

Alamo v. State, 738 So. 2d 1018, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10698, 1999 WL 599248 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Miriam Alamo appeals the summary denial of her amended motion for correction of sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The trial court denied the motion as being successive. Because the documents attached to the trial court’s order do not confirm this conclusion, we reverse and remand for further consideration. If the trial court again reaches the conclusion that the motion is successive, it should attach supporting documents to its order. Otherwise, the trial court should evaluate Alamo’s claim that the sentencing court used the wrong score-sheet to determine if she was sentenced in accordance with State v. Lamar, 659 So.2d 262 (Fla.1995).

Reversed and remanded.

PATTERSON, C.J., and FULMER and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Miriam Alamo appeals the summary denial of her amended motion for correction of sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The trial court denied the motion as being successive. Because the documents attached to the trial court’s order do not confirm this conclusion, we reverse and remand for further consideration. If the trial court again reaches the conclusion that the motion is successive, it should attach supporting documents to its order. Otherwise, the trial court should evaluate Alamo’s claim that the sentencing court used the wrong score-sheet to determine if she was sentenced in accordance with State v. Lamar, 659 So.2d 262 (Fla.1995).

Reversed and remanded.

PATTERSON, C.J., and FULMER and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

738 So. 2d 1018, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10698, 1999 WL 599248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alamo-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack