Gentry v. State

652 So. 2d 518, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3576, 1995 WL 150285
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 7, 1995
DocketNo. 95-640
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 652 So. 2d 518 (Gentry 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.

Bluebook
Gentry v. State, 652 So. 2d 518, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3576, 1995 WL 150285 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The summary denial of Gentry’s 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence is affirmed without prejudice. Gentry alleges illegal consecutive habitual offender sentences under Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994). The correct remedy to seek relief is a properly filed Rule 3.850 motion. Bunch v. State, 647 So.2d 1080 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Callaway v. State, 642 So.2d 636 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (question certified), review granted, (Fla. Feb. 15, 1995); Massey v. State, 648 So.2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).

AFFIRMED.

COBB, PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gentry v. State
659 So. 2d 490 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
652 So. 2d 518, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3576, 1995 WL 150285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gentry-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.