Carvajal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Carvajal v. State

4 So. 3d 1256, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1787, 2009 WL 605412

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 11, 2009

Docket3D08-2666

StatusPublished

This text of 4 So. 3d 1256 (Carvajal 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

Carvajal v. State, 4 So. 3d 1256, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1787, 2009 WL 605412 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the summary denial of Jose Antonio Carvajal’s (“defendant”) Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. The trial court incorrectly ruled that the motion was insufficient because it was not properly sworn. See Judge v. State, 596 So.2d 73, 77 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (“Unlike a motion pursuant to rule 3.850, the [rule 3.800(a) ] motion can be filed without an oath because it is designed to test issues that should not involve significant questions of fact or require a lengthy evidentiary hearing.”). Accordingly, we reverse the order entered below, and remand for the trial court to determine the merit of defendant’s rule 3.800(a) motion.

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the summary denial of Jose Antonio Carvajal’s (“defendant”) Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. The trial court incorrectly ruled that the motion was insufficient because it was not properly sworn. See Judge v. State, 596 So.2d 73, 77 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (“Unlike a motion pursuant to rule 3.850, the [rule 3.800(a) ] motion can be filed without an oath because it is designed to test issues that should not involve significant questions of fact or require a lengthy evidentiary hearing.”). Accordingly, we reverse the order entered below, and remand for the trial court to determine the merit of defendant’s rule 3.800(a) motion.

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 So. 3d 1256, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1787, 2009 WL 605412, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carvajal-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack