Bostic v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bostic v. State

790 So. 2d 515, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 9152, 2001 WL 747520

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 5, 2001

DocketNo. 4D01-1422

StatusPublished

This text of 790 So. 2d 515 (Bostic 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

Bostic v. State, 790 So. 2d 515, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 9152, 2001 WL 747520 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the trial court order summarily denying his motion to correct sentence which identified his prosecution no. 93-1850CF10A. Appellant’s motion was filed under rule 3.800(b)(2), Fla. R.Crim.P., but that would not apply because he did not appeal. Neither is rule 3.800(a) relief available, as he is challenging the legality of his sentence in a 1988 prosecution, and demanding gain-time in the same case.

Relief was properly denied by the trial court. Its order is affirmed, without prejudice to appellant’s right to seek relief if available under rule 3.800(a) in a motion challenging his sentencing in the 1988 prosecution, case no. 88-22357CF10A, and in seeking gain-time relief with the Department of Corrections. Black v. State, 771 So.2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), dismissed, Table No. SC01-245, 786 So.2d 1183 (Fla. Feb. 9, 2001). If the appellant is not satisfied with its ruling, then he can file a petition for writ of mandamus with the appropriate circuit court. See Clements v. State, 761 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

AFFIRMED.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the trial court order summarily denying his motion to correct sentence which identified his prosecution no. 93-1850CF10A. Appellant’s motion was filed under rule 3.800(b)(2), Fla. R.Crim.P., but that would not apply because he did not appeal. Neither is rule 3.800(a) relief available, as he is challenging the legality of his sentence in a 1988 prosecution, and demanding gain-time in the same case.

Relief was properly denied by the trial court. Its order is affirmed, without prejudice to appellant’s right to seek relief if available under rule 3.800(a) in a motion challenging his sentencing in the 1988 prosecution, case no. 88-22357CF10A, and in seeking gain-time relief with the Department of Corrections. Black v. State, 771 So.2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), dismissed, Table No. SC01-245, 786 So.2d 1183 (Fla. Feb. 9, 2001). If the appellant is not satisfied with its ruling, then he can file a petition for writ of mandamus with the appropriate circuit court. See Clements v. State, 761 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

AFFIRMED.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

790 So. 2d 515, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 9152, 2001 WL 747520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bostic-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack