Fernandez-Tellez v. State

89 So. 3d 1070, 2012 WL 2010271, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8910
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 6, 2012·No. No. 3D12-221·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s motion, which sought an award of additional credit for time served. Although Appellant’s motion was brought in the alternative under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) and Rule 3.850, Appellant is not entitled to relief under either provision. His claims are not properly brought under Rule 3.800(a), see Johnson v. State, 60 So.3d 1045 (Fla. 2011); Crawford v. State, 77 So.3d 807 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), and are time-barred under Rule 3.850(b) (a motion for postcon-viction relief will not be considered if filed more than two years after the judgment and sentence become final, subject to exceptions for newly-discovered evidence, retroactive application of a fundamental [1071]*1071constitutional right, or failure of retained counsel to file a timely postconviction motion).1

Affirmed.

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

Fernandez-Tellez v. State, 89 So. 3d 1070, 2012 WL 2010271, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8910 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

89 So. 3d 1070 (Fernandez-Tellez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carnet v. State
223 So. 3d 1093 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)
Ruiz v. State
127 So. 3d 580 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)