Hathcock v. State

930 So. 2d 832, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8928, 2006 WL 1540909
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 7, 2006
DocketNo. 4D06-1741
StatusPublished

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

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

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
930 So. 2d 832, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8928, 2006 WL 1540909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hathcock-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.