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

Dolan v. State

780 So. 2d 982, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3475, 2001 WL 273846
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 21, 2001·No. No. 4D00-4349·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The order denying appellant’s postcon-viction motion is hereby affirmed without prejudice to his filing a legally sufficient motion within the time remaining under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Catis v. State, 741 So.2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (citing Vento v. State, 621 So.2d 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), where court found 3.850 motion legally insufficient where defendant failed to provide [983] sufficient facts supporting his claim of ineffectiveness).

POLEN, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

Dolan v. State, 780 So. 2d 982, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3475, 2001 WL 273846 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

780 So. 2d 982 (Dolan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Catis v. State
741 So. 2d 1140 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Vento v. State
621 So. 2d 493 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)