Green v. State

83 So. 3d 883, 2012 WL 162122, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 677
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 20, 2012·No. 5D11-1376·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm Green’s convictions and sentence without prejudice to his right to seek appropriate and timely postconviction relief. See Dunbar v. State, 35 So.3d 54, 55 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (sentencing errors that occur after effective date of amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), even if formerly deemed fundamental or patent on face of record, cannot be reviewed by appellate court if issue is not raised at sentencing or in timely post-sentencing proceeding pursuant to Rule 3.800); see also Williams v. State, 56 So.3d 899 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).

AFFIRMED.

MONACO, EVANDER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.

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

Green v. State, 83 So. 3d 883, 2012 WL 162122, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 677 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

83 So. 3d 883 (Green v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tommy L. Green, Sr. v. State of Florida
190 So. 3d 1026 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)