Fernandez-Tellez v. State
This text of 89 So. 3d 1070 (Fernandez-Tellez v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
89 So. 3d 1070, 2012 WL 2010271, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fernandez-tellez-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.