Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Bell v. State

Bell v. State

895 So. 2d 1290, 2005 WL 673296
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 24, 2005·No. 5D03-3762·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

895 So.2d 1290 (2005)

Ellis D. BELL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D03-3762.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

March 24, 2005.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Rose M. Levering, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lamya A. Henry, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm because a claim under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.700(c)(1) that a defendant should have been sentenced by the judge who accepted the plea must be preserved to be cognizable on appeal. See Davis v. State, 677 So.2d 1366 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, PLEUS and MONACO, JJ., concur.

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

Bell v. State, 895 So. 2d 1290, 2005 WL 673296 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

895 So. 2d 1290 (Bell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Acee v. State
935 So. 2d 1258 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
Summerlin v. State
901 So. 2d 997 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Eastwood v. State
895 So. 2d 1290 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)