Earle v. State
851 So. 2d 742, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 8779, 2003 WL 21349459
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 11, 2003·No. No. 4D02-4093·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Scott Earle challenges an order that denied his rule 3.850 motion for postcon-viction relief. We reverse and remand for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to address Earle’s sentences in light of State v. Klayman, 835 So.2d 248 (Fla.2002); State v. Travis, 808 So.2d 194 (Fla.2002); Hayes v. State, 750 So.2d 1 (Fla.1999); see also DeFreis v. State, 814 So.2d 1166 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). We find no error with the trial court’s disposition of Earle’s other claims.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Earle v. State, 851 So. 2d 742, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 8779, 2003 WL 21349459 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).
851 So. 2d 742 (Earle v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Nichols v. State Farm Mut.
851 So. 2d 742 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)