Grooms v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Grooms v. State

661 So. 2d 69, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6560, 1995 WL 358271

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 16, 1995·No. No. 95-01231·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Floyd E. Grooms appeals the denial of his motion entitled “Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” which he stated he was filing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court treated the motion as one brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) and denied relief on the basis that the motion was untimely. Such treatment was in error and we reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court treat the motion as one filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) and consider the merits raised therein. See, e.g., Poiteer v. State, 627 So.2d 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

Reversed and remanded.

THREADGILL, A.C.J., and FULMER and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Floyd E. Grooms appeals the denial of his motion entitled “Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” which he stated he was filing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court treated the motion as one brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) and denied relief on the basis that the motion was untimely. Such treatment was in error and we reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court treat the motion as one filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) and consider the merits raised therein. See, e.g., Poiteer v. State, 627 So.2d 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

Reversed and remanded.

THREADGILL, A.C.J., and FULMER and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

Grooms v. State, 661 So. 2d 69, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6560, 1995 WL 358271 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

661 So. 2d 69 (Grooms v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related