Harris v. State

829 So. 2d 381, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 16093, 2002 WL 31465583
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 6, 2002·No. No. 4D02-2828·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant filed a motion to withdraw his plea pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(i). The state treated it as a motion for postconviction relief and argued it was untimely. On that basis, the trial court denied the motion.

In its response to our order to show cause, the state now concedes that the motion was timely as a motion to withdraw the plea, admitting its representations to the trial court were erroneous. Based upon the state’s concession, we reverse the order denying the appellant’s motion and remand for the trial court to consider its merits.

WARNER, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

Harris v. State, 829 So. 2d 381, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 16093, 2002 WL 31465583 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

829 So. 2d 381 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Preciose v. State
829 So. 2d 381 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)