Hathcock v. State

930 So. 2d 832, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8928, 2006 WL 1540909
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 7, 2006·No. No. 4D06-1741·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the circuit court’s orders without prejudice for appellant to file a legally sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion or a rule 3.850 motion if the resolution of this case would require an evidentiary hearing. See Williams v. State, 899 So.2d 451 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Boatwright v. State, 859 So.2d 539 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Milne v. State, 807 So.2d 725 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

FARMER, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

Hathcock v. State, 930 So. 2d 832, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8928, 2006 WL 1540909 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

930 So. 2d 832 (Hathcock v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Milne v. State
807 So. 2d 725 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Boatwright v. State
859 So. 2d 539 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Williams v. State
899 So. 2d 451 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)