Harrison v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Harrison v. State

837 So. 2d 598, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1578, 2003 WL 327656

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 14, 2003

DocketNo. 2D02-3646

StatusPublished

This text of 837 So. 2d 598 (Harrison 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.

Bluebook

Harrison v. State, 837 So. 2d 598, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1578, 2003 WL 327656 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Johnny Harrison challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his mo[599]*599tion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.

In his motion, Harrison alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future sentence enhancing effects of the plea in regard to an as yet uncommitted crime. In Stansel v. State, 825 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), we held that this claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. We certify the same question that we certified in Stansel.

Affirmed.

WHATLEY and CASANUEVA, JJ„ Concur.

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