Haughbrook v. State
658 So. 2d 639, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7966, 1995 WL 437253
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 26, 1995·No. No. 95-00930·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
Herman Haughbrook appeals the denial of his motion brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court properly rejected his motion because it was not properly sworn. The denial of his claim is, however, without prejudice, and he may refile a properly sworn motion in the trial court. Anderson v. State, 627 So.2d 1170 [640] (Fla.1993). Haughbrook may refile his motion within 30 days from the date of this opinion and such a prompt refiling will not be time barred. Miller v. State, 617 So.2d 332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Haughbrook v. State, 658 So. 2d 639, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7966, 1995 WL 437253 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).
658 So. 2d 639 (Haughbrook v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hickey v. State
763 So. 2d 1213 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Pavey v. State
720 So. 2d 563 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Daniels v. State
685 So. 2d 1344 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)