Dennis v. State
758 So. 2d 1199, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5536, 2000 WL 561862
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 10, 2000·No. No. 4D99-4301·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Jason Dennis argues that the trial court erred in denying his amended 3.850 motion on the ground that it was untimely and successive. We agree with Dennis as his amended motion was “filed” in accordance with Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla.1992), three days before the trial court denied his initial 3.850 motion.
Nonetheless, we have considered the merits of his claim and conclude that any error was harmless. See, e.g., Wilson v. State, 436 So.2d 908 (Fla.1983).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dennis v. State, 758 So. 2d 1199, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5536, 2000 WL 561862 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).
758 So. 2d 1199 (Dennis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fernandez v. State
758 So. 2d 1199 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)