GURTH v. State
This text of 50 So. 3d 785 (GURTH 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
Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the factual basis used to support her plea in this appeal of the denial of her Rule 3.800(a) motion. “A rule 3.800(a) motion cannot be used to challenge the factual basis for a plea.” Marshall v. State, 35 So.3d 121 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citing Sanchez v. State, 979 So.2d 1004 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)). Appellant’s challenge was to her conviction, not to her sentence, and was not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Cook v. State, 885 So.2d 911 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Moreover, appellant’s motion cannot be considered under Rule 3.850, because her time for filing a Rule 3.850 motion has expired. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
50 So. 3d 785, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19830, 2010 WL 5347068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gurth-v-state-fladistctapp-2010.