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

Clemons v. State

779 So. 2d 600, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1802, 2001 WL 166982
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Clemons v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 816 So. 2d 1180 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 21, 2001·No. No. 4D00-3603·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirm. As to Clemons’ claim challenging the legality of her sentence in light of the unconstitutionality of the 1995 sentencing guidelines pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000), our affirmance is without prejudice to refile a facially sufficient postconviction motion claim. See Rivero v. State, 758 So.2d 723 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

This affirmance is likewise without prejudice to Clemons presenting her gaintime claim administratively to the Department of Corrections, and, if necessary, seeking review of the Department’s ultimate decision through extraordinary writ petition to the circuit court in the county in which she is incarcerated. See Gatto v. State, 768 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

DELL, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ„ concur.

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

Clemons v. State, 779 So. 2d 600, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1802, 2001 WL 166982 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

779 So. 2d 600 (Clemons v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gatto v. State
768 So. 2d 1169 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Rivero v. State
758 So. 2d 723 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Heggs v. State
759 So. 2d 620 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)