Harris v. State

49 So. 3d 865, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19451, 2010 WL 5174347
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Harris v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 974 So. 2d 1076
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 22, 2010·No. No. 4D10-665·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We summarily affirm the circuit court’s denial of Harris’s rule 3.800(a) motion to [866]*866correct an illegal sentence and motion for rehearing, which the court construed to be a rule 3.850 motion. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850. We caution Harris that the filing of successive or otherwise procedurally barred claims will result in proceedings to determine appropriate sanctions. See State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999).

Affirmed.

STEVENSON, TAYLOR and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

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

Harris v. State, 49 So. 3d 865, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19451, 2010 WL 5174347 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

49 So. 3d 865 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Spencer
751 So. 2d 47 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)