Brant v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Brant v. State

817 So. 2d 1039, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 7713, 2002 WL 1174247

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 5, 2002

DocketNo. 3D02-1289

StatusPublished

This text of 817 So. 2d 1039 (Brant 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

Brant v. State, 817 So. 2d 1039, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 7713, 2002 WL 1174247 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of appellant Richard L. Brant’s motion for post-conviction relief as to grounds 4 and 5. Denial of defense motions for acquittal, on the charges of possession with intent to sell and for aggravated assault on law enforcement, are not cognizable under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See, e.g. Johnson v. State, 649 So.2d 948 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)(issue which can be brought on direct appeal not cognizable by motion for post conviction relief).

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of appellant Richard L. Brant’s motion for post-conviction relief as to grounds 4 and 5. Denial of defense motions for acquittal, on the charges of possession with intent to sell and for aggravated assault on law enforcement, are not cognizable under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See, e.g. Johnson v. State, 649 So.2d 948 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)(issue which can be brought on direct appeal not cognizable by motion for post conviction relief).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

817 So. 2d 1039, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 7713, 2002 WL 1174247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brant-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack