Alexander v. State
571 So. 2d 122, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9644, 1990 WL 212025
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 26, 1990·No. No. 90-479·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
As the matters contained in appellant Robert Lee Alexander’s post-conviction motion were not cognizable under Rule 3.800(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, the motion was correctly denied, and would have been long ago time barred if asserted by motion under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Alexander v. State, 571 So. 2d 122, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9644, 1990 WL 212025 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).
571 So. 2d 122 (Alexander v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Harris v. State
47 So. 3d 850 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Martell v. State
676 So. 2d 1030 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)